NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?

[gusgusterson]

link

[nqth]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?

Many thanks for the link!

[soultek]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?

looks like an interesting book. thanks for the link

[nqth]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?

It's an interesting issue, luxury going "mainstream". What is very now is, imo, avant garde going this route. What you you think about this?

[Faust]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?



I have a very mixed reaction to this book. It is obviously written by a WASP, "OMG, those godless commies and the chinks want luxury goods now! the horror! the horror! An the Japanese - what do THEY know about quality, right?!." This is, of course, ridiculous.

She does make good points about compromising quality in order to reach the middle class. Only I fail to see the problem with that. Today, a man who makes close to six figures can hardly afford to buy a bespoke suit, because of other expenses. The amount of money you have in the bank does not equate your sense of style, far from it. She seems to think that only some kind of ephemeral Western aristocracy is capable to appreciate luxury, which is - again - ridiculous.

The real problem, and she touches upon it, is the reasons why the middle class buys, which is not to own a quality item, but because of marketing. That's a good point, but hardly a new one, and has certainly been discussed on these forums. I also like that she touched upon buying for the sake of buying, via her discussing durability of expensive luxury goods versus transiency of less expensive ones that give the middle class more reasons for rampant consumerism, and provide handsome living for LVMH shareholders (who are probably WASPs and French aristocrats to begin with). Again, hardly a new point.

I don't agree with her pessimistic ending either. Luxury will never lose its luster, if by luster she means a certain connection with and appreciation for artisanal and creative work, the way Wim Wenders mentioned in Notebooks on Cities and Clothes.

I guess I'll wait for a paperback in my local library. Buying a $28 book is a luxury. Actually, the publisher should've made it $128, you know, to prevent some middle class philistines from buying it.

[nqth]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?



Faust, did you see any number, or more specificinfo, about compromising quality. Any info where, who were and who arethe producersfor Chanel, Dior, Hermes, ..., what in fact is the "compromising" (for example using leather from Poland rather than from Italy ...)

I think there is book aboutEnglish culture, and there is a chapter about whobuys what.A friend of mine told meabout it:-). It's more less like the buying behaviour of thearistocraticis unchanged, as the same is behavoiur of the less wealthy. Because they don'treally care.

The middle class always has aspiration, so they are always trying to buy better stuffs in both term of quality and images. We all know that, but it's interesting bc these are supported by solid observations.

I am mostinterested inhow the luxury houses seethe newluxury, the difference between the images and the real things...

[Faust]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?

[quote user="nqth"]

Faust, did you see any number, or more specificinfo, about compromising quality. Any info where, who were and who arethe producersfor Chanel, Dior, Hermes, ..., what in fact is the "compromising" (for example using leather from Poland rather than from Italy ...)

I think there is book aboutEnglish culture, and there is a chapter about whobuys what.A friend of mine told meabout it:-). It's more less like the buying behaviour of thearistocraticis unchanged, as the same is behavoiur of the less wealthy. Because they don'treally care.

The middle class always has aspiration, so they are always trying to buy better stuffs in both term of quality and images. We all know that, but it's interesting bc these are supported by solid observations.

I am mostinterested inhow the luxury houses seethe newluxury, the difference between the images and the real things...

[/quote]

I was going by the review alone, I haven't seen the book - so, it's hard to say.

I think she is right about the luxury houses, who are now driven by MBAs with absolutely no sense of quality. They can't teach you that in business school. As a matter of fact, they teach you completely the opposite, how to cut corners in order to maximize the profit. It's much worse if you are a public company and are at a mercy of your shareholders. It's much better for a privately owned company like Chanel, and even better for a designer owned company like Alaia.

[nqth]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?



So let me know when you will read it:-) I am looking forward to.

I think I changed my view about Chanel when I saw the film they made with Arte. Ofcourse it is kind of advertising, but i like how theyconcentrated onpeople behind the collection, the shoemaker, the woman who made beads... It really looks like it might be years ago:-) a lot of going here and there, waiting... wasting time and effors. I think they don't seem to know what is "optimization" means:-))

[macuser3of5]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?

[quote user="nqth"]

Faust, did you see any number, or more specific info, about compromising quality. Any info where, who were and who are the producers for Chanel, Dior, Hermes, ..., what in fact is the "compromising" (for example using leather from Poland rather than from Italy ...)[/quote]

I don't know of country of origin really applies anymore when it comes to the output quality... For instance, Allen Edmonds, stodgy/bland as they are, make very good shoes, better quality than a lot of Italian companies throwing out glue-job soles with corrected leathers. Vass, in Budapest, Hungary, makes some of the best shoes, period, and the cost is a lot less than equivalent goods from traditional sources like Italy. I do think this is where a lot of cost cutting is being done, the garments/shoes in question may in fact be 100% made in Italy, but if they are made to a poor spec and sold with the high markups traditionally commanded by Italian luxury, that seems to be the real problem.

Perhaps I've gotten cynical, but Made In Italy has lost nearly all its cachet for me over the past few years. I'm less concerned with where something is made than how it is made, and whether or not the people making the goods are being exploited and recieving a fair wage. This takes time, doing research, getting feedback from other buyers, etc, but it is worth it. That cuts down on the mystique, the mystique which I feel benefits the fashion industry like none other. Is there even a Consumer Reports equivalent for the fashion industry? It seems long overdue.

[nqth]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?



I know I know. But I am not talking about a person, or a group of people commited to their profession. Here in Poland there is also a guy who makes shoes by hands and his are said to be one of the best quality around. They are "exceptions that confirm the rule":-)

I meant ratherbigger productions, suppliers... who could make it to the high end market. You know, bc the communism in Poland has destroyedthe tradition of craftmanship, care for quality... It's not that people didn't want to do things right, but they could not, partly bc lack of materials, clients, partly simple bc they had to make their living doing sth else. Things could be built back once again nowwhenthe communism has gone, but it is a difficult proccess still, partly, bc there is strong competition...

One of the best example is the problem with factories in China that produced dolls for Mattel. I am not saying that China cannot produce luxury products. It could happen everywhere, but the scale is much larger with China, andchinese producershave to make more efforts in quality control.

[macuser3of5]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?

Sorry if I came across as argumentative/etc, because I know that wasn't what you meant, nor was that my intention. :) I do feel, though, that a lot of consumers focus on Made In Italy as a gold standard and ignore all else.

[nqth]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?



No problem:-) I didn't find your post argumentative. I think the same as you do about the "country" issue.It's all about specific producers...

[Faust]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?

[quote user="macuser3of5"][quote user="nqth"]

Faust, did you see any number, or more specific info, about compromising quality. Any info where, who were and who are the producers for Chanel, Dior, Hermes, ..., what in fact is the "compromising" (for example using leather from Poland rather than from Italy ...)[/quote]

I don't know of country of origin really applies anymore when it comes to the output quality... For instance, Allen Edmonds, stodgy/bland as they are, make very good shoes, better quality than a lot of Italian companies throwing out glue-job soles with corrected leathers. Vass, in Budapest, Hungary, makes some of the best shoes, period, and the cost is a lot less than equivalent goods from traditional sources like Italy. I do think this is where a lot of cost cutting is being done, the garments/shoes in question may in fact be 100% made in Italy, but if they are made to a poor spec and sold with the high markups traditionally commanded by Italian luxury, that seems to be the real problem.

Perhaps I've gotten cynical, but Made In Italy has lost nearly all its cachet for me over the past few years. I'm less concerned with where something is made than how it is made, and whether or not the people making the goods are being exploited and recieving a fair wage. This takes time, doing research, getting feedback from other buyers, etc, but it is worth it. That cuts down on the mystique, the mystique which I feel benefits the fashion industry like none other. Is there even a Consumer Reports equivalent for the fashion industry? It seems long overdue.

[/quote]

You are already here ;-)

[macuser3of5]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?

haha, true... :p What I mean though, is that I really would like a magazine to step up to the plate and actually *gasp* review the buys of stores and so on, first-hand encounters/etc. It's kind of annoying that fashion mags are already stuffed with adverts, does the editorializing need to mirror that?

[Fuuma]

Re: NY Times book review of ?Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster?

I do believe the author makes a basic classification mistake; luxury is not linked to the intrinsic value of an item but is in relation to its worth as a positional good (not a bad definition here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positional_good). It does not matter if an item quality fluctuates for the better or worse or even stays the same, what?s important is who can have access to it relative to the demand for such a good. As soon as an item becomes accessible to lower socioeconomic classes, it is indeed ?cheapened?, and intrinsic value be damned. The whole idea that the upper classes of yore had, as a whole, an eye and interest in finely crafted goods in themselves, shows an incomprehension of the relationship between luxury and status that is disconcerting. Esthetes were few and far between then and they are still now, I see no reason to believe otherwise.

On luxury and quality: Dishwashers used to be luxury items and now they?ve lost that status in the occidental world, even though they are, in all likelihood, of a much higher quality than they used to. On the other hand, mid-range bespoke is now a luxury item while it was once worn every Sunday by average people going to church.