A conversation with Story mfg.

AW 2020, Image by Hollie Fernando

Being sustainable is currently cool; Saeed Al-Rubeyi likens it to this generation's version of punk. "It's our countercultural, anti-establishment movement," he said. "And just like punk, it has become mainstream, and its aesthetics have been co-opted."

Story mfg., founded in 2013 by Saeed and his wife Katy, is an example of this tussle between sustainability and commercialization. Incorporating the signs of symbols historically associated with the environmental movement, in their designs mushrooms, tie-dye, peace signs, fruit, vegetables, and crochet, are fashioned into smocks and scarves, sewn and printed onto t-shirts and hoodies. Like merch for the environment, the garments display the cyclical nature of fashion in action. These motifs have become fashionable once again alongside the rise in conversations around living more holistically. 

This nose for a trend is rooted in Katy's experience as a trend forecaster at WGSN, where she told "high street companies who to copy and how to make it quicker." Therefore, it might be simple to think that Story mfg. are merely profiting off the rise in fashionable, sustainable practice; however, it is not as simple as that. Their clothes are made incredibly well, adhering to methods that limit waste, use natural dyes and fabrics, and employ fair labor practices. They are creating new clothes, but they are making them with the people and planet in mind. 

To make garments this way comes at a price; the clothing is expensive. "We can't afford our clothes," Katy told me. "We just wear old samples." Saeed continued, "I know our clothes are expensive, but I want to tell people 'you don't have to have them. Don't be so entitled.'" It is within this space of contradiction that I find Story mfg. an interesting case study to explore. Within their words, you are reminded that we don't that often need new clothesーbut sometimes we really, really, really want them! 

Shonagh Marshall: I want to begin by asking you to talk about what you both did before setting up Story mfg. Saeed, you worked at Primark, and Katy, you worked at the trend forecasting agency WGSN. Do you think that this experience meant you were coming from a different perspective than other people that have championed sustainability in fashion? Did you wake up one day and feel responsible for working in these spaces?

Saeed Al-Rubeyi: I think we have a slightly different view from other people in the sustainable space. For example, I don't think either of us mainly believes that fast fashion is the problem, even though that seems wild to say. Although people who buy fast fashion are part of the problem, it is all symptomatic of a broken system with many, many issues that are creating more problems.  We believe that we are at a point where fast, cheap fashion is accessible to people who have less money, less access to more expensive, better-made goods. So to say that it's all wrong is such a privileged position to take. The argument is often to buy better and buy less, but it's always more expensive to do this. So fast fashion sometimes is the answer, just like supermarkets and fast food. 

Katy Al-Rubeyi: I don't think one day we woke up and said, "we've lived this horrible life, and we need to change." Living more sustainably and thinking in a different mindset happened gradually. First, we became vegan, which was about animal cruelty versus kindness rather than environmental reasons. Then slowly, I became more educated. Gradually we learned more and more and started to tackle all these different layers. 

Saeed: There was a counter-establishment, countercultural spirit to beginning Story mfg. We had been on the other side. I was at Primark; I wasn't a designer; I was working in editorial. 

Katy: I was at WGSN, and I was part of the problem, but I don't feel ashamed about it. I don't feel like I was aware, which is a privileged thing to say. I think the world and society at that time made it aspirational to live like that. It was aspirational to want those things, so how could that be wrong? It was like a Matrix moment when I realized. It was like someone had pulled the plug. I thought, "oh, actually, this stuff is polluting, and there are alternatives." We never set out to change the world, and we still don't think we're going to do that. That's not our aim to make the world a better place, but we want to make better things for people, even if that's just a small amount of people. 

Shonagh: In your designs, you lean into hippie tropes: mushrooms, tie-dye, and crochet, for example, reimagining them within a contemporary fashion context. Did you recognize there was a rise in fashionable people living a more holistic lifestyle today? 

Saeed: We've got so many references, they're all very tongue in cheek. 

Katy: It's a play on historical fashion. 

Saeed: They are little signs for people in the know. We do vintage styles, we're not making crunchy, hippie stuff, but we use a hippie aesthetic. Our use of mushrooms is a good example. For five or six years, we've been using mushrooms as a motif. When we use mushrooms, we know that people understand we are using them as a symbol for both countercultural drugs and nature. Now that trend has gone full circle, and five years on, we see it everywhere in fast fashion designs, so we haven't included mushrooms in the last few seasons. What was anti-establishment is now the establishment. So we've moved on to something else. 

It is the same with tie-dye; tie-dye is unique because it's got so many levels. There's the home tie-dye, which is naive. Then you've got high-level artists. We work with artists. Our seasonal dyers very carefully fold the fabric in a certain way, working for hours and hours. They dye it with natural dyes using 2000-year-old fermented pits. The whole thing takes several days and lots and lots of craft. It's very considered; it involves lots of people and lots of expertise. But we also just love anything that's quintessential tree hugger style because we're trying to attract people to be tree huggers. The world needs more tree huggers. 

Embroidery, Image by Story mfg. team

Katy: We love the vintage t-shirts that tree huggers in the 60s and 70s wore. We take those, and we make tongue in cheek versions that are relevant for today. For example, we have one that says 'Number one best planet' and 'Mother Earth' down the sleeves. It's the same message, but it's more modern. 

We went through a phase when we were in Thailand, where we were eating mushrooms all the time. Not psychedelic magic mushrooms, just mushrooms in our meals. They were so god damn tasty; they were so meaty and good. We'd been vegan for quite some time at that point, and these mushrooms were so incredible. We liked the idea of using the designs to talk about how nature is so good for you in all different ways. Nature can be tasty, so we came up with little slogans like "mushrooms are good for you, have some vitamin D." This also links back to the vintage t-shirts the tree huggers would have won. 

We also love naive drawings, artwork, and embroidery, for example, 70s denim jackets that people would embroider themselves. Many of those have got mushrooms on them because they were made by hippies or people who love nature. Our references become a collection of things. 

Saeed: It's a meticulous collection of things. Some things are conspicuously absent from our brand, which people, I think, would assume we would reference. We don't ever talk about or include motifs around crystal healing or astrology, or anything religious. We would never put anything religious in our designs or anything culturally important, a Buddha, for example. It is incredibly offensive.

Katy: Another reference is everyday sci-fi. One of my favorite authors is David Mitchell; he writes everyday mundane stories where some weird thing will happen. Similar to the author Haruki Murakami's work. It'll be a typical day, and the characters will be sitting down to eat their breakfast, and a fish will fall out of the sky. I love these weird, bizarre realities, is it our world, or is it a different reality? We're also both really into sci-fi. We like the idea of our clothes, having a slight weirdness to them. 

Saeed: Every time we do a new collection, we explain the inspiration and the theme. We've always done it in a tongue-in-cheek way to tell a story that is entirely made up. But it's so close to reality that many journalists write about it seriously when writing about the collection. We get absorbed in this made-up fantasy story, which could then be diluted down to a small blue mushroom on a jacket. To people that are real fans of the brand, they pick apart all the little details. We also use alien motifs and standing stones; we like the otherworldly, ancient signs, and symbols. 

We generate most of our art ourselves, but we do t-shirts with artists. A lot of them are Western, so we put in the brief, no religious iconography. Lots of people don't realize that it is inappropriate to use a Buddha, for example. It is not until you travel to Cambodia or Thailand, and the local people ask you, "please don't buy Buddhas," that you realize that it's a problem. You don't know until you're told. 

Shonagh: It is incredibly important, especially when you're designing clothes and selling them to make a profit. I read that you would like your clothes to have ruin value, which is a concept to describe architecture that once eventually collapsed leaves behind aesthetically pleasing ruins. What does this mean with regard to your clothes?

Saeed: We would like our clothes to have some value after they're destroyed by wear. We love vintage clothes; they get better the more you love and wear them. We make that thinking part of the design process; we want our stuff to be used and loved. I can't think of anything that would be cooler than if we were in our 70s or 80s, and people were buying our clothes on eBay for much more than they were worth. Another facet is acknowledging the material they're made of is going to go into the ground eventually. With clothes, this can either be poison or something positive. So we choose materials that are made with their in consideration. I know in architecture that ruin value doesn't mean complete decomposition, but this is a part of it for us. Just because it doesn't have a form anymore, it still contributes value back to the earth. We don't want to be a part of the negative cycle of clothes.

Shonagh: So how do you make your clothes? What is the process, what are they made from, and where are they made?

Saeed: They're primarily made in India, with some elements happening in Thailand.

Katy: We have one fabric made in Thailand, which we've had since we started. It's such a special fabric; the people who make it are retired rice farmers. They make it in their own homes. We were mindful not to go to their country and say, "Wow, that's amazing." Use it for one season and never use it again. So we're using it until they want to stop working with us.

Saeed: All our clothes are made of natural materials; cotton, linen, and hemp. Then it's dyed with natural dyes. These dyes are almost entirely local, they're usually from the same state, but some dyes are from India's north, whereas we work mostly in the south. We use some bits and pieces that are not 100% natural, like elastics and some plastic buckles. We use these because we could find no alternatives whatsoever.

Shonagh: Why did you choose India? 

Katy: We made the first few collections in the UK, for the first couple of years.

Saeed: We only made clothes in the UK, though. We made the fabrics in India. The place we work in India is the one we have used since the beginning of Story mfg. We would just take the materials to the UK and then make the clothes there. We only did that because a cyclone blew away the tailoring unit in India, so they had no way of stitching the clothes, so making in India was never an option for us at the beginning. We were such a small company, making such a small amount, that making in the UK was the only way to do it because we could do it locally, it was expensive, but it meant we could have eyes on the process. 

Katy: It was also a complete trial and error process for us. Even though we had both worked in fashion, we had no connections at all; we had no way of finding manufacturers. They don't teach you that at university. You don't leave with a fashion degree and a manual that outlines here are all the people who do tailoring, or these are the people who do denim. So we had to try it. We worked with three different small factories in the UK and two local seamstresses. We would make samples and minimal runs of three or five items at a time. Then we progressed to small factories, and we would make 50 of something. That almost did us in; it was such a massive quantity at the time. Gradually, we started doing trials with India once they got back on their feet with their tailoring unit. 

Saeed: It's not a very easy question to answer because lots of Story mfg. decisions were small pivots. We worked in England until it stopped making sense. All with a view to choose the thing that we could have the most involvement in. It's quite unusual to be so connected to your production. I don't think many brands are as connected as we are. Also, in India, there's so much interest in natural dyes and so much culture. And there is a passion for keeping that alive. There is a reverence and understanding of craft, and we reacted to that. 

Shonagh: Could you make the same fabric in the UK?

Saeed: You could do all of it, but it feeds into our thinking about sustainability. For example, there's an argument that almond milk is terrible for the environment because it uses up lots of water. That argument is based on the fact that people are growing almonds in California, which is essentially a desert, so they bring in water to do it. So yes, maybe they're a very thirsty crop, but you're growing them in an incorrect environment. If almonds are grown, where almonds grow, in a more biodynamic place, then water wouldn't matter because there's plenty of rainfall. 

To make fabrics here in the UK means that we have to grow cotton elsewhere, bring it in, and weave it here. In contrast, India has all the stuff that we need, grown locally. We can work with the earth there and the weather there. The factory is super basic, we do natural dyeing there, and the textile gets very wet. In a factory elsewhere, anything that's wet means you have to have dryers. But in India, because it's so warm, everything is sun-dried. That means 60% less energy use because we've done it in an appropriate place. For us, it feels like the right move to situate our production where the thing naturally is, instead of shoe-horning it elsewhere.

The team in India, Image by Glenn Larkby

Shonagh: Such a broad subject within ethical clothing manufacture is paying the people a fair wage. How much do you pay the people who make your clothes?

Saeed: We work with a facility; we don't own them. We are just one of their partners. They bill us to get paid. We are unusual compared to a lot of other brands; we don't barter or bargain. We work on a product together. They give us a price, and we say if we can sell it for that cost. A dress, for example, to make it is usually around £160. I think people would expect it would cost somewhere around £16—that would be in-line with other brands and how they work to make their markups. The way we check if we think we are paying a fair wage is we look back at our price list for what we were paying in the UK, and we are always paying the workers in India more.

Katy: The difference in India is that they care for what they're making, and it's a very slow process. I have experience working with British high street brands. I would travel to China and Turkey for negotiations and buying. They wouldn't tell us the fabric price, the trims, etc., we could ask for that information, but they would typically give us a final price for the garment based on all the work. In India, it is different; it depends on how much fabric is in the dress, whether the material is linen or cotton, and whether it's been dyed or other techniques have been used. Based on the work, the price goes up, up, up. Because we've worked with them for a long time, we recognize there's probably a week's amount of work in that dress that cost £160. 

On top of that, there is the care that they give to the making process. It's the industry norm that you get what you're given, and you pay the price; you don't ask to see the workers or the process. Then you get the final piece, and it hasn't been trimmed; it's just shoved in a bag. Whereas the people we work with care about so much. We communicate over slack and almost every day, they send me pictures and ask, "what do you think of this?" They give us a price at the end, and yeah, it's costly, but you pay more money for that care and attention. Their work is so incredible.

Saeed: The fact that our clothes cost so much to make is one part of this whole thing that I can't untangle. I don't know how to approach the topic. When other brands, and people, make something that they claim is sustainable and ethical, I can't work out how it can be so cheap. Having a brand, I know people feel encouraged to ask how much Rajesh gets paid. However, I'm reminded by Rajesh that he doesn't want me to tell people his salary. Brands can publish what wages they pay and the factories they use, but it's challenging to know what to do with that information. It is out of context. But luckily, having a brand means that we only have to focus on ourselves. 

Shonagh: The dress costs £160 to make; how much markup do you add, and how much profit do you make? I am interested in a garment costing a certain amount of money and how those funds get split between the maker, overheads, and yourselves. 

Katy: In terms of our salaries, until last year, we were paying ourselves minimum wage so that all of our money stayed in the company and that we could invest it in other things. 

Saeed: We move profits around. I think there's something about our generation not being tied to rules about the profit margins. When we are doing our womenswear collection, we talked to our sales agent Paul Anthony Smith, and he explained that a fair amount of markup between the production cost and the wholesale price is 65%. He said that's what most people aim for. With that 65% markup, you pay your sales agent, staff, and other overheads. But 65% markup on £160 is ginormous. So when it comes to it, we don't do that—we markup to around 30-40%. People in the positions of power in business historically wouldn't do that. I think that's because they're too far removed from the subject; they're disconnected. They believe that the rule is right because it works, and they don't see all the broken parts below them.

Shonagh: We live in a time where people are talking a lot about positionality and social justice, acknowledging and questioning the White Supremacy in existence in the fashion industry. Do you think about the history of colonialism when working in India? I'm guessing most people who purchase your garments are white, upper-middle, or upper-class people. How do you approach that? 

Saeed: Some people I know get into tangles thinking about this and decide they shouldn't be working in India. I'm so cognizant of it and worried about it because I feel victimized by it on a personal level. I'm from Iraq, a country that has been completely ravaged by this. 

At the beginning of Story mfg. we weren't talking about it, but we were always careful about it. Now we're talking about it, being careful about it, and talking to others about it. You're right, many white middle-class people are buying our clothes, but there are also many people of all different heritage buying our stuff too. It's a bit of a quandary that we're in because that's where a lot of money is, that's where a lot of marketing budgets go, and these stores have the money to buy our clothes. We're working with craft-based products, and craft equals extended amounts of time for our particular niche business. So if you have people spending a long time using their expertise, you have to pay them for all that time and expertise. So it is only those who are privileged who have the money to spend on it. 

We continuously think about it and worry about it. We make sure that we're checking in and talking to people who are involved at all levels. We make sure that the work we do with people isn't just transactional. Not everybody wants to be creative, but when people we work with want to be creative with us, they can be creative. We aren't just using people, countries, and cultures as a resource. We are working with them. In India, we work with Indian people to make and dye the fabric and make the clothes, but we also work with Indian stylists, Indian photographers, and Indian businesspeople. We think about whether we're taking more than we're putting back in, and we try to make sure that we put in more than we take.

In a basic way spending a lot of money is an excellent way to give back more than we take. When you go to a country, and you know you're paying more because you're white. That white tax is something we enjoy spending, we know that we are not paying a local price, but we want to pay more because we can pay more for that product. We could go to the place next door and make that same dress for under £50. We're paying that price because we want to; we're working with crafts that are good for the earth and good for the soil; we've worked on regenerative agriculture projects, for example. 

Katy: We also put importance on relationships with people; we would not work with people for a season and then leave. We commit to keeping doing it every season. 

Saeed: That's why we work so slowly and only start working with people if we think we can make a long term commitment.

AW 2020, Image by Hollie Fernando

Shonagh: My final question is, do you have a vision for your fashion utopia?

Saeed: The number one thing that I covet the most is for products to be made so that they don't create any negative impact. They always create a positive impact. For example, if you buy a can of Coca-Cola, it's taken loads out of the earth, it's had a very high cost in terms of people, and it's also bad for you—it will make you unhealthy. I imagine a world where you drink that Coca-Cola, and it's positive for your health, and everything that it was made of gave people good jobs, well-paid lives, and an excellent work-life balance. The ingredients that it was made of were grown or synthetically made to create more positives than negatives. I think this model would take the guilt out of the equation.

Katy: I was going to say about guilt. That would be the nicest thing if you could buy stuff without any guilt because you know you're doing something positive. That no animals have suffered, and no people have suffered.

Saeed: We'd like that to be seen on all levels. Story mfg. is such a craft-based process; it's always going to be expensive. But there are ways and should be ways that other brands can do stuff that is much faster-paced, technology-based, and that isn't so expensive. So everybody can get involved. 

Katy: If we can invent computers and the Internet, people can create a way to industrialize natural indigo so that jeans aren't made from chemicals. They could do that tomorrow.

Saeed: We don't think that human nature lends itself to buying less or always purchasing secondhand. I feel like we're on this path to getting what we want all the time. Eventually leading to Star Trek, where you've got a replicator, you ask what you want, and it makes it out of molecules. We're never going back. We can't regress into just buying secondhand. So we have to find some way to bend capitalism to our will and make it so that stuff is good. At some point, it'll become apparent to companies that it's in their interest to create virtuous systems because things will become cheaper. Here in Brighton, not so long ago, people talked about how renewable energy was always more expensive. Now it's cheaper here to use renewable energy than fossil fuels. Our bills are cheaper if we use the wind farm energy provider, and it will just be the same as everything else. It is better; we've just got to get over this hill.