Italian fashion brand Prada has openly admitted the cultural roots of a new shoe design following backlash over its similarity to traditional Indian shoes. This recognition arises as discussions intensify in the fashion sector about the need to value non-Western inspirations and honor cultural heritage in design.
The controversy began when Prada unveiled a new pair of slip-on shoes that closely resembled the traditional Indian jutti—a handcrafted leather shoe known for its curved toe and intricate embroidery, widely worn across various regions of India. While the luxury label did not initially reference any cultural inspiration, fashion observers and social media users quickly pointed out the striking similarities, sparking accusations of cultural appropriation.
Critics pointed out that in promoting the shoes without acknowledging their roots, Prada failed to honor the cultural and craftsmanship heritage associated with a design profoundly meaningful to South Asian communities. Numerous voices stressed that these actions contribute to a recurring trend where global fashion brands adopt elements from non-Western traditions without adequately recognizing or compensating the cultures they borrow from.
In reaction to the criticism, Prada issued a declaration recognizing that the design was inspired by traditional Indian shoes and showed gratitude for the artistry that shaped the collection. The brand also reaffirmed its dedication to honoring global cultures and striving for more inclusivity and understanding in its creative approach.
This move by Prada is part of a broader reckoning in the luxury fashion industry, where discussions around cultural representation, appropriation, and inclusivity have taken center stage. Consumers today are increasingly vocal about holding brands accountable—not just for the aesthetic choices they make, but for how those choices engage with and reflect diverse cultural narratives.
Traditional Indian juttis are more than just fashion items; they are a symbol of regional identity and artisanal excellence, with many handcrafted by skilled artisans using methods passed down through generations. Historically, juttis have been worn by both men and women, often for formal occasions, religious events, or everyday wear. Their construction typically involves leather or textile bases, hand embroidery, beadwork, and vibrant colors—all hallmarks of Indian craftsmanship.
In the past few years, there has been an increasing worldwide recognition of traditional Indian designs, influenced partially by diasporic impact, cultural interactions, and a rising interest in eco-friendly fashion methods. Nonetheless, this heightened awareness has raised worries about the distinction between appreciation and appropriation. When international brands embrace these styles without giving credit, it not only obliterates the history behind these designs but also sidelines the communities and artisans who keep them alive.
Prada’s approach to the criticism might indicate a move towards more thoughtful interactions with worldwide design customs. The brand recognizes the misstep and has suggested the possibility of working with artisans from the areas that influence their collections. These collaborations—if carried out genuinely—could open opportunities for acknowledgment, financial backing, and the safeguarding of traditional craftsmanship.
Industry experts note that while inspiration is a natural part of fashion’s evolution, the context in which a design is adapted matters. Giving credit, telling the full story, and including the voices of those whose cultures inform a design are key to creating an ethical and respectful creative process. Brands that fail to do so risk alienating consumers and perpetuating long-standing inequities in how fashion’s cultural capital is distributed.
For Prada, recognizing their actions might mitigate some of the backlash they face, but it also establishes a standard for how international fashion brands should handle cross-cultural design in the future. Shoppers today are more knowledgeable and involved, leading to a greater call for openness, not just in obtaining materials but also in the origin of concepts.
Several other fashion brands have faced similar scrutiny in recent years, prompting some to overhaul their creative and marketing strategies. Some have started collaborating directly with craftspeople, while others have incorporated advisory panels to ensure cultural sensitivity. These steps, though varied, point toward a more inclusive fashion future—one that values origin as much as innovation.
As fashion becomes increasingly global, discussions surrounding ownership, heritage, and recognition grow more complicated—and more crucial. The dialogue goes beyond mere aesthetics, incorporating economic fairness, intellectual rights, and communities’ entitlement to see themselves portrayed precisely and respectfully on a worldwide stage.
By acknowledging the Indian origins of its shoe designs, Prada has made an attempt—reactive as it may be—to align with these shifting values. It is uncertain if this moment will result in a sustained transformation in how the brand interacts with cultural influences, but it signifies a new phase in fashion’s continuous pursuit of increased accountability.
Ultimately, the future of design lies in collaboration, transparency, and respect. As the industry evolves, brands that embrace these principles are more likely to foster authentic connections with global audiences and build legacies rooted not just in style, but in cultural integrity.
