When the designer brand Prada SpA featured ‘leather flat sandals’ on the ramp at the Milan Fashion Week a month ago, Indians all over caught on they were being had. It was the modest ‘Kolhapuri chappals’ being plagiarized and they were rightly outraged. Prada did not acknowledge the cultural origins or the craftsmen who had made the ‘Kolhapuris’a part of Maharashtra’s daily wear; but what perhaps got the Indian goat was the pricing: A $5 slip-on tagged at $1,340 (Rs 1.16 lakh)! And the cheek, not a penny for the original designers of the unique toe-hold chappals?
The backlash was severe. Prada had underestimated our nationalistic troll army, which went to town against the brand appropriating Indian culture. Within days, Prada acknowledged the Indian roots of its new footwear line, and accepted it was inspired by ‘traditional Indian footwear’.
But here’s the rub. There are plenty upholding India’s heritage. But why aren’t there enough Indian entrepreneurs who can do what Prada did? Those who can design and brand ‘kolhapuris’ and other footwear and make them international products. Surely there is no rocket science about holding fashion shows andclevermarketing. The Kolhapuri is a 12th Century product. It has its innate strength. Why do you need a Prada to discover it?
Low-value leather
India has a huge leather industry. The domestic sector produces a whopping 3 billion square feet of leather annually and employs over 4.4 million people. India is the world’s second largest exporter of leather garments, the third largest exporter of saddlery and harnesses and the fourth largest exporter of leather goods in the world.
Unfortunately, it is high volume, but low value we export. In FY2023, leather and leather products exports peaked at about $5.4 billion. This is peanuts considering the size and the manpower the industry employs. Over the next two years, exports fell 18-20 percent, mainly does to the disruption of the Eurozone by the Ukraine war.
The main problem is the minimal value addition. Most of the small sector units are ‘mule’ suppliers of basic leather for large producers abroad; or they manufacture shoe uppers for hundreds of Italian and American designer shoe brands. The dirty work is done by the tanneries in Kanpur and Tamil Nadu; the spoils are reaped by the Addidas’ and Reeboks.
The problem with the industry is its small, fragmented character, and its inability to modernize production and cater to fast-changing consumer taste. Most of the small units are in UP’s Kanpur, Agra and Saharanpur on the Ganga water system. In Tamil Nadu they are located in Chennai, Ambur, Ranipet and other hubs along the Palar river system. They generate huge waste, and are major pollutants. Lacking the resources to modernize, the industry faces civic action including forced relocation by municipal and environmental authorities.
That the total market capitalization of the top 8 listed Indian leather companies is only Rs 1,487 crore shows how fractionalized the Indian leather industry is. Just one of them, Bhartiya International Ltd, accounts for a market cap of Rs 1,142 crore. The rest are small entities.
Religious imagery
The protest against Prada is also a reminder of how clever business folk in the West have discovered great commercial potential in India’s ancient history and culture – from the erotic sculptures of the Khajuraho temples to the imposing images of elephant Lord Ganesh and Goddess Kali.
But often the use of mythological and religious imagery is culturally insensitive, and even boorish. No wonder there have been protests in recent years against Ganesh toilet seats, Kali underwear, Krishna bathmats, Om flip flops, and countless other images that many Hindus find disrespectful or offensive. It has gotten so bad that the Hindu American Foundation (HAF) has actually brought out a handbook of ‘Dos’ and ‘Don’ts’.
But why stop at protests. There are thousands of clever businessmen among the Indian diaspora. They know Indian culture and art forms; or they can get help to ensure religious and cultural imagery is artistically appropriate. Why leave these things to the firangi, when Indian businessmen can be the bridge between artisans and craftsmen at home and a lucrative ‘culture’ market abroad?
Regrettably, there has been little government intervention to modernize the leather units and add value to their products. Government bodies such as the Export Promotion Councils for Handicrafts or the Handloom and Handicrafts Export Corporation of India (HHEC) are an apology for generating business for artisans.
In fact things have moved the other way with thinly disguised communal campaigns against Kanpur’s historic tannery industry. India’s ‘Leather City’ that once boasted of over 600 tanneries are down to just 200 as most have been shut on environmental or other grounds.
The ban on beef trade in several states has also squeezed tanneries as supply of cattle hides is down to a trickle. A senior reporter who recently investigated the footwear industry in Kolhapur, told this writer that the traditional ‘mochis’ were forced to use buffalo hides for Kolhapuri chappals. This made the product hard and less comfortable.
It is good our troll armies have taught Prada and their ilk a lesson. But we also need our own Sabhyasachi Mukherjees, Ritu Kumars, Tarun Tahilianis and Anita Dongres to design, build and promote Kolhapuri chappals and other leatherwear before Prada and Armani gets hold of them.