Conspicuous Consumption
See Thorstein Veblen
6
Because there is never a lack of nouveau riche people in the world.
5
I can’t help feeling kind of sad about the amount of money people feel they need to spend to prop up their sense of self-worth. At a time of such great income inequality, it’s shameful that anyone resents workers wanting to earn a living wage on one 40-hour-a-week job.
I certainly don’t resent enjoying some luxury, but slathering one’s self in logos is as vulgar tacking $100 bills all over yourself. Surely they could put some of that money to better use.
5
Bottega Veneta: “When your own initials are enough.” I think that sums it up rather elegantly.
2
So relentlessly sad.
Such desperate folk, trying to fill their empty insides by plastering the names and initials of perfect strangers all over themselves.
The fashion labels are laughing all the way to the bank about what lemmings their customers are.
Get some self-confidence, people!!
7
People where Gucci to show they’re socially progressive? I mean, come on.
8
Supreme's logo is subversive. Since when did Fendi, Chanel, and Gucci logos become subversive? Their use of logos is far from subversive. They are the logos of the status quo.
1
I read Legs and Logos and my mind put them together and thought the article was about LEGOS. Yup, brands are powerful.
9
Yes, I understand. When quality and style are lacking, just slap a logo a logo on it.
22
Logos are for the insecure. They also are great fodder for the counterfeiters.
22
“For youthful fans, the Gucci logo is a tag, a way of stating, ‘I am socially responsible,’” Mr. Pedraza said. “It gives you a very clear identity that goes beyond a fashion statement.”
Nah, there is nothing remotely progressive virtue signaling with clothes that the vast majority of people cannot afford. I get that people want to flex, but seeing it as anything other flexing is willfully ignorant.
27
Along with TrumPutin’s recent attempt to reboot the planet-threatening nuclear arms race, this logo frenzy reeks of nostalgia for the worst aspects of the 1980’s.
11
corporate tools/fools & unoriginal
17
Last year I was going to name my daughter Fendi, but as of this last summer I am naming her FFFFFF to follow the logo craze trend.
10
Veblen would be very pleased, and Bierce not so much!
4
In the end, even without the perfect Gucci belt, it isn't in the least bit subversive, unless you also think "I really don't care, do U?" represents subversion.
4
Five letters: T A C K Y
29
Now, THAT's a logo I'd wear!
2
@Diva Yes, and five more: Gauche. OK six, then.
"Fools' names and fools' faces are always seen in public places."
--My Mom
14
Big logos on expensive clothes seem to speak more to a need to publish one's theoretical net worth than anything else. It is telling that the most expensive brands, like Berluti and Hermes, and the most timeless designs are not splashed with logos but rather built upon the quality of the goods and finesse of design.
Along with ugly sneakers, I can't wait for the hypebeast/logo craze to disappear.
38
So, so, so true!
5
I feel as if the trend of logo heavy trend is very telling of the age we find ourselves in. Indeed the practice of putting on such a conspicuous display of wealth is very Trump-esque, as he was (and still is) known for putting his name on everything he touches.
27
I'm more than happy to wear a logo - when they start paying me to advertise their brand.
38
True bombshells never wear logos.
Laren Stover, from “The Bombshell Manual of Style.”
16
I'll wait for the branded Kirkland Signature fashions, thank you very much.
24