Louis Vuitton VS Chanel
- Thread starter VioletSofia
- Start date
I'm going to repeat a post I made this morning in another thread which explains my feeling about Chanel. Its not mr favorite brand. I do realize others love it though. I'm just not one of them.
I simply can't get over who Chanel was in real life, a thinly-veiled prostitute who lived with a high-ranking Nazi officer in WWII. For me, the brand doesn't signify luxury. It signifies a woman that bankrolled her company by bedding various men as their mistress, and was a very strong Nazi sympathizer. To me, the brand doesn't typify anything that I find luxurious or morally worthwhile. While I'm not Jewish and I do realize other companies and people were culpsble during the war, the fact alone of how she managed to bankroll her company and a brand while basically earning the money on her back lessens the luxury of the brand for me.
While I think the bags are pretty, that combined with the fact that the designs of "Chanel" are really Karl Lagerfeld" and have been for 30 years, make me realize it's a misnomer to think you are getting a "Chanel" design. Karl Lagerfeld himself said in a recent interview that his designs bear no resemblance to Chanel's and that he designs only what he wants and doesn't even try to follow her designs. What you are getting is his designs, with her name. He freely admits it. Clearly, if he was to remove her name, profit margins would be lost, the company would "tank," and hence, he keeps the name. It's a giant charade.
I would pick the jewelry, or just about anything over Chanel. It's not really even Chanel, and even if it were, the woman herself . . . ? Yuck. It was living off one man after another, often married, and using her skills in the bedroom to finance her company. There are words for that.
As much as I love the designs of some of the handbags, in the back of my mind it wouldn't convey high-end luxury to me, nor something to aspire to or for.
I simply can't get over who Chanel was in real life, a thinly-veiled prostitute who lived with a high-ranking Nazi officer in WWII. For me, the brand doesn't signify luxury. It signifies a woman that bankrolled her company by bedding various men as their mistress, and was a very strong Nazi sympathizer. To me, the brand doesn't typify anything that I find luxurious or morally worthwhile. While I'm not Jewish and I do realize other companies and people were culpsble during the war, the fact alone of how she managed to bankroll her company and a brand while basically earning the money on her back lessens the luxury of the brand for me.
While I think the bags are pretty, that combined with the fact that the designs of "Chanel" are really Karl Lagerfeld" and have been for 30 years, make me realize it's a misnomer to think you are getting a "Chanel" design. Karl Lagerfeld himself said in a recent interview that his designs bear no resemblance to Chanel's and that he designs only what he wants and doesn't even try to follow her designs. What you are getting is his designs, with her name. He freely admits it. Clearly, if he was to remove her name, profit margins would be lost, the company would "tank," and hence, he keeps the name. It's a giant charade.
I would pick the jewelry, or just about anything over Chanel. It's not really even Chanel, and even if it were, the woman herself . . . ? Yuck. It was living off one man after another, often married, and using her skills in the bedroom to finance her company. There are words for that.
As much as I love the designs of some of the handbags, in the back of my mind it wouldn't convey high-end luxury to me, nor something to aspire to or for.
I used to work for Chanel and used to find it amusing that the company is now owned by Jewish brothers.
I find the leather goods lovely, but overpriced. I'm quite hard on things and the soft leather just doesn't stand up like LV does for me
charleston mom, i think there was a recent post that louis vuitton itself was also involved in somewhat similar practices? "thinly veiled prostitute" issues aside, LV also provided services to the nazi party in order to keep the company afloat.
i can understand that you would not support a company that has such a past...but i think honestly there are many more companys still afloat today that did the same.
in addition, the whole karl thing...there are many such instances, do you have issues with all of them, too? like how marc jacobs is designing for LV...so you have a designer, well known and unarguably talented/genius, yes, but not as famous as the old house he is working for...using tha name? i am not sure what is so wrong about that. isn't that what makes fashion great, when you inject new talent into an old house? although it would be silly to call karl "new talent" of course, but i think there is some similarity.
OP, political issues aside, i think that you should just go to your local chanel boutique (even if you have already gone a million times
, try on the bags, and if they thrill your soul, make a purchase. there is always that 14 day window for returns in case you change your mind...although check with whatever vendor you chooset to make your purhase through.
i can understand that you would not support a company that has such a past...but i think honestly there are many more companys still afloat today that did the same.
in addition, the whole karl thing...there are many such instances, do you have issues with all of them, too? like how marc jacobs is designing for LV...so you have a designer, well known and unarguably talented/genius, yes, but not as famous as the old house he is working for...using tha name? i am not sure what is so wrong about that. isn't that what makes fashion great, when you inject new talent into an old house? although it would be silly to call karl "new talent" of course, but i think there is some similarity.
OP, political issues aside, i think that you should just go to your local chanel boutique (even if you have already gone a million times
, try on the bags, and if they thrill your soul, make a purchase. there is always that 14 day window for returns in case you change your mind...although check with whatever vendor you chooset to make your purhase through.
I'm not a fan of chanel, and not because of the price either. I have purchased and returned 2 chanel bags this past year because they didn't feel like luxury. The nylon lining and zippers feel cheap to me, and the glue on the strap can be seen. The quality certainly doesn't warrant the $4k price tag.
You see more LV bags because they are cheaper to start off with. IE, you see speedies and neverfulls everywhere because they are affordable luxury. I live in an affluent community, and when you compare LV and Chanel bags based on their price, I see more flaps than mahinas.
Also, whenever I go into a Chanel boutique, I never get good customer service. My LV store is way different--they are amazing! When I'm paying a premium for goods, I also want a premium experience, and I just think that Chanel doesn't give that.
Just my two cents. I can appreciate the elegance and timelessness of Chanel bags, but they're just not for me.
You see more LV bags because they are cheaper to start off with. IE, you see speedies and neverfulls everywhere because they are affordable luxury. I live in an affluent community, and when you compare LV and Chanel bags based on their price, I see more flaps than mahinas.
Also, whenever I go into a Chanel boutique, I never get good customer service. My LV store is way different--they are amazing! When I'm paying a premium for goods, I also want a premium experience, and I just think that Chanel doesn't give that.
Just my two cents. I can appreciate the elegance and timelessness of Chanel bags, but they're just not for me.
I like both. But price does matter and chanel keeps raising it. I do think having a black flap chanel is a must.
I have to admit I am lusting to add a new Chanel to my collection...but I always tend to gravitate towards LV instead of Chanel. I know the re-sale value of Chanel is way better than LV but really I buy my bags in the frame of mind of keeping them (not selling them on ebay).
Also it's funny how alot of people complain about quality issues with Chanel. The $4000+ jumbo flap that has shoddy stitching (from bags used less than 1 week) or the chains unraveling on PSTs in less than a few months...I'm sure LV has alot of issues too (especially with the entry level LV bags - Neverfull or Speedy etc) but for a bag that cost almost 2-4x as much as a high quality LV...I'm expecting nothing but perfect. lol
Also it's funny how alot of people complain about quality issues with Chanel. The $4000+ jumbo flap that has shoddy stitching (from bags used less than 1 week) or the chains unraveling on PSTs in less than a few months...I'm sure LV has alot of issues too (especially with the entry level LV bags - Neverfull or Speedy etc) but for a bag that cost almost 2-4x as much as a high quality LV...I'm expecting nothing but perfect. lol
Last edited:
If not LV, I prefer Hermes over Chanel.
They are too overpriced compare to their quality that keeps going down the hill these days
Omg! Ditto!
I've looked at Chanel in passing, as every now and then my favorite SA at Saks always tries to lure me into the Chanel room, but have never really ventured into those waters before, maybe because of cost or what's worth it to me, and have always, always been in love with Gucci and LV bags, last several years more LV than anything.
i think LV is a better fit for my personal style and lifestyle. i do like the quilted aspect of chanel, so i bought something in etoile. 
I like Chanel more than Louis Vuitton. I actually used to hate Louis Vuitton, especially the monogram. However, I bought my first LV this year (a damier ebene speedy 30) and the quality was impeccable; it made me really appreciate why people love LV. I'm hopefully buying a Neverfull & an agenda for school soon. LV has really durable pieces, though I'm not a fan of the monogram for bags (especially in multicolore).
Chanel (2.55s especially) looks effortlessly classic. There are definitely Chanel bags/lines I don't like (Cambon, Coco Cocoon...
), but the classic flaps are so beautiful. I only have a small 2.55 but I'm desperate for a Jumbo.
Louis Vuitton is much more affordable, but I feel it's a tad overdone; I see too many people in New York carrying LV.
Chanel (2.55s especially) looks effortlessly classic. There are definitely Chanel bags/lines I don't like (Cambon, Coco Cocoon...
), but the classic flaps are so beautiful. I only have a small 2.55 but I'm desperate for a Jumbo. Louis Vuitton is much more affordable, but I feel it's a tad overdone; I see too many people in New York carrying LV.