Veblen vs. Post

The observations and conclusions of Thorstein Veblen’s Theory of the Leisure Class (1899) is roughly the following:

1. “Conspicuous consumption” – when social institutions exploit the consumption of unessential goods for the sake a personal profit and not for productivity or pride of workmanship.
2. “Pecuniary emulation” – including male’s “ownership” of women to affirm prerogatives
3. To be seen doing work is to be lowered in social esteem
4. Ceremonial labour is executed only for show, in concert with the busy idleness of conspicuous leisure
5. The superficial display of good manners/form is a waste of time, yet continued as an enhancement of one’s social prestige
6. Modern day gentlemen still display gluttony, just more discreetly (caviar instead of beef-bones)
7. The lavish display by a host is to demonstrate that he/she has such an excess they must share
8. The obsessive decoration of homes is usually the outcome of housewives defined by wasteful expenditures of time and money
9. The poor cling to cheap imitations that emulate the upper-class habits accepted as the sign of social respectability
10. When taught to believe that saving their earnings is not that beneficial, people waste it on useless products
11. The age-old craving for gold and diamonds (breeders of war and misery, lacking all social use) is supplemented by modern hunger for brand-names that give objects a value they do not actually possess.


Now I need to pit this against Emily Post and her rationale as to why we must uphold etiquette and manners in her book Etiquette in Society, in Business, in Politics, and at Home (1922). It is interesting to note that she was the daughter of a wealthy architect. This comic is not part of the argument, but sheds some light on Post's thinking none the less:

the approval matrix

Click image to enlarge.

Above is "The Approval Matrix" from New York Magazine. Their "deliberately oversimplified guide to who falls where on our taste hierarchies." It's so simple the way the quadrants can define despicable highbrow or brilliant lowbrow and everything in between. The events are a teeny bit dated as this is from the April 20, 2009 issue. But I should make my own version pertaining to luxury objects and current architecture. Last night I went to see Terry O'Reilley and Mike Tennant talk about their radio show and now book "The Age of Persuasion" at the Toronto Reference Library during their Author Series. During the book signing, I asked him if his work extends beyond bringing people into the store. What about the persuasions that occur within it? Retail interiors and their messages to consumers? Or architecture on a larger scale? The entire building as advertising for a city? He said that he hadn't done any talks on that yet. But maybe he'll tap into that in the near future. And then he proceeded to sign my notebook like this:


On the approval matrix, I say that would land in the highbrow brilliant quadrant :)

Revised Outline

On Luxury

Emerging effects of a special article on its surroundings and how the design develops to purport this object, specifically through the channel of luxury goods.


preface

abstract

a brief history on luxury & collection
-what makes things of high value (example: the tulip from 1634-1637)
-curation & containers (example: Sir John Soane’s residence)
-a curiosity cabinet, not an encyclopaedia
-criteria for haute couture

religion & luxury
-faith, transcendence, ecstacy, myth, sacrifice, ritual, community, identity
-luxury item as new ecclesiastical relic (church built around unique article)
-icons (the immaterial world created around the object)
-neo-neoclassical (D&G ad); christian louboutin 2010 campaign
-chanel and dior 2010 ad campaigns

the runway
-Carrousel de Louvre, Grand Palais, etc (plans, sections, elevs…)
-example: Fendi runway at the Great Wall
-the model and ratios, space

the store & packaging
a. window display, lighting
b. dimensions, ratios
c. s, m, l, xl (tag, bag, rack, shelf, boutique..)

the street
-blogs, paparazzi, fashion districts
-prey or junkie? (paparazzi & blogger culture) – social surroundings ….
-rich retail areas of world (ginza, rodeo, champselysee) – real estate & urban planning….

the synthesis
10 objects and the design of their ultimate displays based on the object itself
-materials, site, etc.
-technical and atmospheric qualities?????
-in an interesting way!!!!! HOW????!!??!!

the luxury list

luxury is hard to define because more often than not, money is not an indication, only a repercussion. the issues of quality, taste, and rarity all feed into its formalization. and of course, that is a large part of its allure. and a collection of items that exemplify luxury speaks to a certain aspect of cultural literacy, a litmus of aesthetic sense, a pulse on the proverbial. and at a time when attention and care to the individual object is rapidly decreasing, the importance of things in general seem to be on the exponential rise. so this list comes at an opportune time to reassess where the archetype of things mass-produced originate. but as this essentially must be a personal interpretation, this is by no means a conclusive list. nor is it ranking the finest of each category. it is basically a smattering of items that have embodied certain ideals of modern culture, without stating the over-obvious or over-saturated. the items listed are from the 19th to 20th century, as anything before become the realm of historical nostalgia and anything after has not withstood the test of time to formulate enough worth. (and although strongly suggested by Don to keep items under $100, this was nearly an impossible feat...)

1. entrée at Davé, Paris
2. one night at the Mercer Hotel, NYC/Chateau Marmont, LA/Hôtel Costes, Paris
3. Diana Vreeland era Harper's Bazaar & Vogue collection
4. Rashômon (1950), Akira Kurosawa
5. The Apple Macintosh (1984)
6. Juicy Salif (1990), Phillipe Starck
7. Moleskine Notebook (1998)
8. Elsa Schiaparelli anything
9. an "It" bag with a designer's name or initial that cannot be visible from a distance of 10 feet or further, nor one with high-knockoff potential/presence
10. vintage jewelry (no costume)
11. ticket stub from Goa, India
12. Veuve Clicquot champagne
13. One ounce jar of La Mer Face cream
14. the classic martini
15. C. Gilson silk bra, panties, chemise and robe set
16. a vintage straight razor
17. the right scent
18. a Helmut Newton print
19. Timor Desk Calendar (1967), Enzo Mari
20. Coco Chanel's cardigan suit
21. makeup by Pat McGrath
22. Christian Louboutin heels
23. Moka pot (1933) from Bialetti
24. The Polaroid Land Camera (1947)
25. Wassily Chair (1925), Marcel Breuer

(special thanks to Mike Lin & John Lee for their insights; also influenced by Nancy MacDonell's "In the Know")

Fendi goes east

Since this happened more than two years ago, before any signs of the recession, it is unknown whether this kind of scale of opulence can sustain itself today. But it is interesting to note how ancient history and existing architecture seeped in meaning and memory has been utilized (or taken advantage of?) in this Fendi couture runway show, by Karl Lagerfeld. Video:

Tentative Outline

ON LUXURY

I. THE CHRONICLES
i. the history of luxury
ii. the history of collection, curiosity cabinets, museums
iii. the history of style and taste
(curated through ... protagonist? theme? decade? style?)

II. THE QUIXOTIC
i. religion and luxury
a. faith, transcendence, ecstacty, myth, sacrifice, ritual, community, identity
ii. deconstruction of imagery
a. icons/spaces
b. psychologies/subtext
c. mythologies
d. packaging
e. association and disassociation

III. THE PRAGMATIC
i. the runway
a. Carrousel de Louvre, Grand Palais, etc. (plans, sections, elev...)
ii. the store
a. window display, lighting
b. dimensions, ratios
iii. the street
a. blogs, paparazzi

IV. THE SYNTHESIS (?)

It's in the bag

Prada is one of the most highly counterfeited designer brands to date. Their reputation is built as an intellectual and opulent status symbol. Authenticity is a big issue. Here is a (not so fool-proof, developed-by-own-experience) way to figure out whether the bag you just bought is real or fake:

The September Issue

Not that I want to make this into an advertisement for a movie that will more-than-likely be nothing beyond mediocre, but I have a strange affinity for the slogan that comes with the movie posters:

"Fashion is a religion. This is the bible."

I've spoken of the semantic and psychological connections between luxury items and religious aspiration. But Anna Wintour is no Jesus figure. It's no wonder she was the inspiration for "The Devil Wears Prada". [September Issue trailer]

Couture Number-Crunching

Numbers don't lie. And these numbers are all-round impressive, giving a more mathematical glimpse of what goes on behind one of these haute couture collections:

Click on thumbnail for larger version.


Gaultier, Chanel, Lacroix, Margiela

[The Cut, 7/13/09 and Style.com]

Spaces of Expenditure

Click on image to see larger version

"Spaces of Expenditure: An Evolutionary Process" is my re-worked version of a timeline of retail typologies from Rem Koolhaas's Harvard Design School Guide to Shopping. Focussing on the main typologies of:
-coffee houses
-auction houses
-designer boutiques
-designer epicentres
-e-commerce
-big box & hypermarkets
-department stores
-arcades
each major innovation is noted.

Designer Family Tree

Click on thumbnail to see the full res version.

I just made this Designer Family Tree to illustrate the three major players in the business of luxury goods: PPR, LVMH, and Richemont and their subsidiaries. From clothing, accessories, wines and spirits, to cosmetics, jewellery and watches, there is also an interesting incestual quality to the way the designers themselves switch from one label to another over the years...also fashion is still very much based in apprenticeships so there are many names under previous designers that you may recognize have their own labels today. The financial stats are also compared point-blank.

Running Abstract....

The Architecture of Luxury Goods

This thesis explores the relationships between the consumer and architecture of selling luxury goods. The need to buy and the desire to buy has refined itself over and over again. From the great covered arcades of Louis XIV to grand department stores, the past has shown us that the politics of a plan or the spectacle of a window display always alluded to more than itself. In pilgrimages to retail cathedrals of today, one seems to expect to find secular salvation. The ultimate goal is to, even if only momentarily, transcend the here and now, to appreciate the incredible, and to cross a boundary to able to associate the self with a higher purpose.

An area often labelled trivial to academic study, most critics of mass culture have pigeonholed the relation of person to object as vicarious, fetishistic, or even sinful. But unlike the Marxist interpretation of “objectification”, the consumer is not estranged from the objects they produce, but rather it is a process of development that can only co-exist with society and culture at its conception. And the strategies people use to assimilate these acquired objects into their lives range from the daily to the cosmological. Consequently, a designer’s promises are consecrated in the glass, concrete, and steel of its houses of merchandise, the contrived displays on the runway, and the polished world of its advertising campaigns. The analysis of their imagery into discussions of psychologies, mythologies, and subtexts deconstructs their attractive packaging down to iconic, and often times ironic, spaces that define current societal desires. The breakdown of the physical anatomy of the product, the context of their creation, and the mechanisms of how they are marketed declare volumes on our culture’s collective notions on value and beauty. The proposal presents a hypothetical sanctuary of luxury, a perverse extension of a Joseph Cornell Box, as an annotated assemblage of transcendental materialism.

Maison E. Goyard

Beyond the overly exposed, heavily counterfeited Louis Vuitton, there is another brand known for it's sturdy trunks and luggage and its unmistakable printed canvas that originated from Paris from the mid-1800s: Maison E. Goyard.

"The fabric represents three chevrons, juxtaposed to form a Y. This evokes not only the name of the Maison itself, but also the universal allegory of the tree; symbolizing both Man, along with three centuries of the Goyard family history and their “Compagnon de Rivière” ancestors." [wikipedia]

There is quite a lengthy history explaining its origins on the official site. And in trying to maintain its "retail ethos" of a "time-honoured practise" of "intimate retail experiences", it still purports special pieces like Malle Cavier Prunier and Malle Cocktail. The design and architecture within those pieces are refined and beautiful, but seen in the context of two centuries after its inception, ridiculously démodé. There is a fine line between antiquated and obsolete...

lookbook

Calling itself the "collective fashion consciousness", LOOKBOOK.nu "is an international social experiment in style. It was inspired by street fashion blogs like the Sartorialist as well as "What are you wearing today?" forum threads across the internet." [lookbook.nu]

Essentially a forum for posting your looks while giving a chance for others to "hype" it up to gain "karma", this site basically affirms the scale of globalization. Just take a look at the labels they all wear, the silhouettes they all conform to, the random snippets of pop culture sound bytes they all quote from for posts.

How many of these photos are calculated, carefully constructed compilations of items of clothing deemed worthy but try to be of the nonchalant vein of a spontaneous spring stroll? Oh, to be aloof, blase, and contrived at the same time. The fabricated scenes are much improved, also, when there is a wonderful building in the background non?

piazza san "luxury goods" marco

NOW:

Roger Federer for Rolex Oyster Day-Date Watch, 2008


THEN:

The Piazzetta di San Marco by Canaletto, 1738


NOW:

Chopard Eyewear "Sky of Sighs" Campaign by Oliviero Toscani

THEN:

The Doge's Palace in Venice by Claude Monet, 1908

Jerry Saltz speaking of the Venice Biennale on now:

"The first thing I noticed when I arrived in Venice ... was the volume of advertising. The Bridge of Sighs is totally surrounded by huge colorful billboards for a clothing store. The entire face of the Academia Gallery is completely covered in a gigantic billboard of the Russian boxer Vladimir Klitschko, wearing a red robe and holding gold roller skates, with the word “Curator” next to his head. Maybe sinking malls have no other way of making money." [New York Magazine]

At least when I did a Flickr search: venice+billboard, more "venice beach, california" than "venice, italy" resulted. All the same, it is a shame, it is a reality, and it must be really profitable.

The Final Frontier

"Louis Vuitton commemorates the 40th anniversary of man’s conquest of the Moon, elevating the theme of travel as a personal journey to a celebration of a voyage of unsurpassed significance for all mankind. The latest Core Values advertising campaign features Buzz Aldrin, who in the course of the historic Apollo 11 mission with Neil Armstrong on 20th and 21st July 1969, became the second man to set foot upon the Moon; Jim Lovell, the commander of the ill-fated Apollo 13 mission in 1970, who - as the world watched with bated breath - heroically guided his crew back to the safety of Earth; and Sally Ride, who in 1983 became the first American woman to venture into space as a crew member on Space Shuttle Challenger." [nitrolicious.com]

Shot by Annie Leibovitz, the three astronauts were brought to a plateau of the Californian desert, where, apparently, the moon takes on a supernatural brightness. It features the Icare bag, which was "named with reference to Icarus, a character in Greek mythology who is the son of Daedalus and is commonly known for his attempt to escape Crete by flight, which ended in a fall to his death." [ilvoelv.com]

All the symbologies and icons seems to line up thus far. But what I think is too sneaky of LV is that they always align themselves with such significant figures whereas, truthfully, LV had nothing to do with their success (Sean Connery, the Coppolas, Mikhail Gorbachev). It hardly seems fair to their competitors who continue faithfully to schillack their ads with pretty airheads and hairless shiny men, who represent the superficiality of the product with true validity. At least Omega, who launched the limited-edition Speedmaster Apollo 11 Moon Watch with Aldrin this week, can actually say he really did wear that watch on his historic moonwalk. But LV is kind of just parasitic. Sure there have always been celebrity endorsements. But this is an entire web video montage of all the significant launches and personal interviews with the astronauts as they reminesce on their accomplishments through the hardships: http://www.louisvuittonjourneys.com/

P.S. This little Louis Vuitton Icare piece of fabric construction measures at 5.9" x 11.4" x 15.5" and costs a whopping $1,530 US.

P.P.S. But maybe it's just space is in right now, considering that the fall collections of Balmain, Karl Lagerfeld, and Preen all showed retro-futuristic motifs that looked to be inspired by old Star Trek costumes.

P.P.P.S. Imagine the next space suit covered in the LV monogram.

The Uncelebrity

Ever since the rise in popularity of reality tv shows and celebrity stalker blogs, the uncelebrity has come into being and now has eventually evolved into an unstoppable but pointless phenomenon. I see this as a parallel to the world of consumer goods. Stars are called stars because they are an entity that is supposed to be not of this planet, untouchable, and pretty. In this way, luxury used to mean that too (from luxus, L. "excess, dislocated"). But now, celebrity status and luxury goods have been democratized:

"Celebrities got pretty boring, once we got to know them a little better. The running feature in Us magazine titled "Stars: Just Like Us!" with its shots of Jennifer Aniston sipping a latte or Lindsay Lohan shoe shopping, only proved that stars weren't like us at all...Thus, the paid professionals who polish celebrity images to a high gloss while spackling over every unusual or unrelatable quirk that might limit a star's ability to move the maximum volume of product off the shelves have effectively retouched themselves out of a job." [salon.com]

What is considered a luxury for one generation is necessity for the next. And now that at least the appearance of luxury is available to all, everyone wants a piece. And that is the same with the once-normal, albeit, spotlight-hungry individuals who are slapped all over People and US Weekly:

"Even as uncelebrities lament being harassed by the paparazzi at every turn, they can't seem to get off that crazy conveyor belt of commodification without transforming every last scrap of their souls into consumable goods."

"And in a new media universe dominated by procrastination-fueled wandering and short attention spans, all it takes is a little intra-uncelebrity sniping to generate headlines far more popular than the now-archaic-seeming news of Mel Gibson's latest expletive-strewn meltdown...headlines as "Octo-Mom to Kate Gosselin: Stop Judging Me!" and "Spencer to Audrina: You're a Ho!""

"Sadly, these insipid stories trickle up from the gutter to so-called legitimate news sources. Chasing diminished ad revenue, uncelebrity pap is born at Radar Online or TMZ.com, then gets picked up by the San Jose Mercury News, L.A. Times or CBS in the hopes of capturing enough page views to keep these relatively serious (and therefore doomed) news outlets afloat for another day."

Yet, we can't help it. We really can't. No one is above a bit of luxury lust just as they are not immune to gossip. It's the human condition. And in a way, this new pseudo-luxury, like this faux-celebrity, is actually a rather unifying force, as we bond over the homogenizing effects of global digital culture, speaking the esperanto of branding and advertising. Today, it is luxury, and not religion, that is the opium of the masses.

the lipstick index

"The idea is that, during a recession, women substitute small, feel-good items like lipstick for more expensive items like clothing and jewelry."
—Norm Scheiber, "Replacement Killers," The New Republic, January 7, 2002

Estée Lauder Chairman Leonard Lauder reportedly coined the phrase “lipstick index” after observing sales surges during 9/11 downturns. Why? People reach for affordable luxuries to feel better. The New York Times notes that in the last few months, lipstick sales have shot up 40% . Even in Indian markets, lipstick sales are growing steadily at 20% & in the case of luxury brands that have a smaller base, the numbers extend even into the triple digits. “Women always want to look beautiful, and what’s the easiest thing to buy? Lipstick. A tube of lipstick for $14.50 as compared to a shirt for $70,” says Jennifer Barnett of Origins. [trendspotting.com]

[Google Trends]

But I guess the boost in lipstick sales came just a bit too late for Max Factor. The makeup pioneer will begin its fade out of U.S. stores starting early 2010, and according to the New Yorker:

"Max Faktor (he changed the spelling later) was a five-foot tall Polish Jewish fugitive who left Russia in 1904 and arrived in California, breaking into Hollywood via manufacturing cosmetics for the film industry. When film changed — from black and white to Technicolor — Factor changed the chemistry and formula of his makeup, and actresses who wouldn't appear under harsh lights — Bette Davis, Carole Lombard, Joan Crawford, Greta Garbo, Norma Shearer, and Claudette Colbert — had new products, which were more flattering. When the company started selling to the public, it often used actresses in its advertising....Unlike some other make-up artists, he was never painted as an effeminate type. Photographs of Factor show him simultaneously as makeup artist, chemist, and father figure."

As with any cosmetics, you're not just purchasing a new shade, you're purchasing a new image of you.

a soundtrack to my thesis

"Pedro, how d'you feel about that one? It looks pretty sweet. It looks awesome. This suit is, it's incredible."

1. Suit - Napoleon Dynamite
2. The Looks - MSTRKRFT
3. Gossip Folks - Missy Elliot ft. Ludacris
4. Sexual Healing - Maximillion
5. Strict Machine - Goldfrapp
6. Sexy Results - Death from Above 1979
7. Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger - Daft Punk
8. (I Can't Get No) Satisfaction - Britney Spears
9. Anthems for a Seventeen year-old Girl - Broken Social Scene
10. Satisfaction - Benny Benassi
11. Barbie Girl - Aqua
12. Paris - Andy Stochansky
13. Masquerade - Phantom of the Opera
14. Forever Young - Alphaville

(58 minutes)

Fifth Ave

Philip Green, British billionaire and holder of 12% of the UK clothing retail market, is scouting Manhattan for Top Shop's second location in America (with one already frantically & thoroughly rifled through on Broadway in SoHo). He is eyeing the empty spot at Fifth Ave and 53rd Street (left empty by Brooks Brothers). With only 2 locations open on this 10-block stretch, it is highly saught after. This is a location that apparently rents for $30 million a year. His competitors are said to be Uniqlo (the Japanese equivalent to a Gap & H&M amalgam, already a neighbour in their SoHo sites), Zara, and Forever 21. And even with the recession, tourists continue to peruse and shop, due to the weak US dollar and escapist activity of consumerism.

It is also interesting to note that the further north along 5th and madison ave you go, the swankier the stores become. From the potential TopShop at 53rd, Abercrombie at 57th, to Bergdorf Goodman at 58th, Jimmy Choo at 63rd, Bulgari 66th, Cartier 69th... It's like the hierarchical stratum of luxury in urban retail planning.