I think luxury is merely a matter of perspective. My grandparents who were very poor would have found a J.C. Penny coat to be luxurious. Women born in a pre-industrial, pre-manufacturing era would consider the costume jewelry in my dresser drawer to be the stuff of queens. If you frame things properly, if you look at your possessions like someone from a different time or culture or life experience would, anything you own can seem magical or luxurious or amazing. You don't have to spend money to see things that way. You just have to see the world a little differently.
This is so true.
When my DH and I were looking for a wedding venue, we took a tour of an old Victorian mansion. They pointed out to us that the pinnacle of luxury was to have these machine engraved strike plates on doors. The kind of thing we could do in 30 seconds on brass today if we wanted to.
Absolutely, and connected with this is the way ‘luxury’ is often used just to display wealth. Such an interesting subject. The people who had those strike plates, they may have wanted them because they were better-functioning, longer-lasting, aesthetically pleasing (a highly subjective matter into which so many factors feed, which can spark off a whole other conversation). But they may also have wanted them to make a statement about their wealth and social status, in a way which is pretty much outdated now, and where it is still practised, it is most often condemned (though of course we have entered the era of Kardashian-style ‘influencers’ and so on, so maybe it’s just moved into a different arena).
I can identify with the former reason (quality, function and aesthetic) but the latter leaves me cold, as I’m sure it does all of us here. The JC Penney coat would have been luxurious because it gave warmth and possibly quality that was hard to afford for BigPurseSue’s grandparents. That’s real luxury.
Another issue in ‘luxury’ is rarity (those strike plates were genuinely rare at that time, probably because the means of manufacture was new, expensive to set up, and not widespread) and while rarity can add to value if the object in question is of great quality, I find myself really bridling at artificially created rarity such as we see with brands like Hermès.
I only keep mentioning Hermès because it’s the one that the most extreme myth seems to surround. I don’t hate the products; I think lots of them are lovely. But the reality is that they could manufacture as many bags as they wanted, however carefully hand-crafted by experts they are, and they limit the quantity in order to feed the perception of rarity, and promote the profligate purchase of (slightly) less expensive items they produce by engendering the perception — a culture in which many of us collude — that they may reward the customer by ‘allowing’ them the opportunity to buy the glittering prize of a Kelly or Birkin at the end of it all, if the customer has shown adequate ‘appreciation’ of and ‘commitment’ to the brand. (And truth be told, there’s an awful lot of those bags out there, and not only the rarity but also the PERCEPTION of rarity is engineered).
These objects may very well be lovely in themselves — I’m certainly not saying they are not worth having or that nobody should buy them, or that anybody is a dupe for buying them — but the market is carefully engineered to maximise profit and a perception of exclusivity (used in the true sense that people are being excluded from it). We’re all dupes if we believe the hype, though. Fair enough, it’s a business, profit is acceptable; we all buy things we like, business makes the world go round, and the monetary value of anything is a product partly of what it cost to make and market, but at this level, it seems even more a product of what somebody is willing to pay for it.
I mean no disrespect at all to any Hermès or Chanel owner. I certainly have my weak spots. I succumb to
Fendi; and all marketing, including that of
Fendi, is manipulative. I aim to stay reasonably objective and weigh up the quality of what I’m buying and it’s value to me. I actually felt rather put off by some recent marketing which had models cavorting with their Peekaboos — which I love — as if they were actually in love with them, wearing those off-putting ‘I-exist-in-a-world-you-can-only-imagine’ expressions
Anybody else?
I can’t succumb to Hermès or Chanel because I would feel so much more manipulated and exploited, in the face of this engineered rarity and artificial culture of reverence. I can respect the skills and the work that go into making the products. But the brand seems to become something close to a religion in some people’s eyes, spoken of in hushed tones and with exaggerated respect. Who knows, I might suddenly realise a Birkin is exactly what I need and is worth the money to me. They are nice bags of great quality. If I can walk into an Hermès store and just buy one, or I wouldn’t mind a waiting list. But I would feel so duped if I let myself climb on that particular luxury merry-go-round of developing a ‘relationship’ with them and playing an artificially engineered game.
