Wednesday, August 22, 2007

Luxury at the Times


Luxury goods and the arts are not dissimilar. Both are ostensibly one-of-a-kind, or limited run objects catering to an exclusive clientele, or one (at least) with refined tastes, and distilled ideologies. So, I found this NY Times article on the demise of luxury goods/industry quite interesting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/21/books/21kaku.html?em&ex=1187928000&en=790d67d55c3b21d6&ei=5087%0A

That being said, though they're pretty ostentatious symbols of consumerism, given half a chance I'd rock a knock-off Birkin bag almost as hard as an original. The difference? I'd probably want to be cremated with the original...leave the knock-off to the kids...I jest, but it's true.

3 comments:

steph said...

beautiful things, like that Birkin bag, are totally artistic...and I love them! Hell yes to being cremated with the Birkin bag!!!

Steve Williams said...

I want to be cremated in my ferragamos................
no doubt
because i dont like going anywhere without them
maybe we can take one thing to heaven..............
ahem

madeleine said...

luxury goods aren't just about exclusivity and consumption, they speak to a time when things were worth doing and doing well.

While I wouldn't position a Birkin at the pinnacle of art, I would argue that the legacy of craft, tradition and elegance does position it ahead of some contemporary art...as for being burned with it...perhaps that's a little inner Viking peeking out.