LoVe Louis Vuitton

Without a doubt, Louis Vuitton is the dominant fashion brand of the world today, generating more money in sales than any other brand in the luxury market. Louis Vuitton was founded in 1854 in Paris by Monsieur Louis Vuitton, who was a master trunk-maker for members of the French aristocracy. While he started out with one single shop on the Rue des Capucines, Vuitton’s merchandise became so popular that only five years later he was able to start expanding his business, purchasing land throughout France in order to set up workshops where his products could be manufactured. He worked with his son, Georges Vuitton, who designed the famous monogram canvas in 1896 and then registered it as the company trademark in 1905. This monogram logo now adorns a variety of Louis Vuitton products, from bags to belts to neckties and has become synonymous with the brand itself. Even as monarchies began to crumble, Louis Vuitton continued to expand as more and more people wished to buy into the dream of luxurious living. War in Europe hurt Vuitton immensely however, and little was done in terms of growth until the early 1980’s, when Henry Racamier (son-in-law of Renée Vuitton) took over and began vertically integrating the company. He opened Vuitton-owned and operated boutiques, effectively cutting out the middleman and increasing profit margins by 40 percent. In 1984, Vuitton went public on the Paris Bourse and the New York Stock Exchange, and the company’s sales had reached $143 million, turning the once small, family-owned business into a global corporate giant.
While Racamier brought Vuitton onto the world stage, the current Chairman of LVMH, Bernard Arnault, is responsible for making the brand what it is today. After a hostile acquisition of the company in April 1990, Arnault began revamping the company’s image – recreating the old notions of luxury travel and reinvigorating the design side of the company. Louis Vuitton quickly evolved from a luggage company into a fashion company, which produces everything from ready-to-wear clothing for men and women, to accessories such as wallets, sunglasses, scarves, and jewelry. Creative Director of Vuitton, and currently the world’s most celebrated designer, Marc Jacobs says that the brand’s image today is all about “mass-produced luxury. Vuitton is a status symbol. It’s not about hiding the logo. It’s about being a bit of a show-off.” This notion of mass-produced luxury and recognizable status has become intertwined with the brand, and is largely responsible for keeping Louis Vuitton so successful throughout the years, despite whatever downturns might be occurring in the economy at the time.

Understanding Fashion Controversies: The Marc Jacobs Case Study

According to a 2004 article entitled Ethics of the Fashion Industry, “politics and fashion have never been a trendy mix”. Formerly, designers and fashion companies with strong messages about “global welfare” were most often considered unappealing to the masses. Fashion has always been an industry obsessed with mass marketing and appealing to the largest amount of [wealthy] customers they can, so why "stir the pot", and risk offending potential clients who would have otherwise made a purchase? I can’t think of anyone more suited to answer this question than Marc Jacobs, creative director of Louis Vuitton and his own Marc Jacobs brand. Since I am not personally friends with Marc Jacobs, I will have to walk you through his affinity for fashion controversy myself.
Let’s start with the Louis Vuitton Monogram Joke bags, created in late 2007. These bags were created when Marc teamed up with Richard Prince, American painter and photographer, who created a line of “joke” themed paintings in the 80’s. It was these joke paintings that fueled the inspiration for a new, colorful twist on the monogram print created by the Paris Fashion House 112 years ago. The only perceived problem with the bags is the text sprawled across them. Jokes like “Every time I meet a woman who can cook like my Mother....She looks like my Father” and “My wife went to the beauty shop and got a mud pack. For two days she looked beautiful. Then the mud fell off” adorn all of the bags, and unsurprisingly, many people hate them. On Bagsnob.com, a reviewer wrote that the jokes were “lame ass jokes your 80 year old sexist uncle tells” and many commentators on the site backed up the review saying:

“The biggest joke of all is the LV label. Is there no concern for devaluing the brand?”

“What woman on this planet would want to be seen with this bag? For me, this is in the same category of offensive as that swastika bag.”

“I think Marc left rehab more messed up than he was before. This line is becoming a joke (no pun intended).”

But the controversy doesn’t just stop there. In mid-2008, just in time for gay pride parades across the globe, Jacobs released the "Rebel Pride" shirt, designed by Jon Lynn. The shirt had many elements typical of gay pride: stars and rainbow flags. The caveat- it was superimposed on the confederate flag, an image displayed with prominence in the South during the Civil War. As a result, the confederate flag is deeply associated with racism, intolerance, and the United States' very own bible-belt. Not exactly what gay pride is all about, is it? Commentators on Out.com said:

“I think it's more for the shock-value than anything else. I mean, if the meaning behind it is so elusive then what's the point?”

“I'm from and live in the Deep South and will always consider the confederate flag offensive. I can only imagine how hurtful it must be for black people.”

It seems risky to offend both women and the gay community, two HUGE consumers of high fashion. So why not take the advice “Ethics of the Fashion Industry” has to offer and avoid alienating your biggest clients? Let me try to explain what I see in both the bags and the t-shirt (I think they’re both great).
I think that sexism and homophobia are both serious issues facing American society, but I also believe avoiding discussion of the subjects all together is the WORST possible way to deal with them. Keeping divisive issues like this secret and taboo ensure their long-lasting persistence within a culture. Marc Jacobs forces us to consider issues like sexism by placing them out in the open for all to see and discuss (and check out the blogosphere- they have been discussed plenty!).
I think women brave enough to carry the Monogram Joke bag are the same women that are strong enough to stand up to men and assert their individuality. The bag is being carried by women who are literally saying to the world, “I have a handle on sexism; I use it to carry my makeup”. And gay men and women sporting the “Rebel Pride” t-shirt are saying, “I can cover up a symbol of racism with one of acceptance”, a message revered by the gay, and various other minority communities. To end, I want to clarify that I am not one to give blind praise to a designer because he is currently dominating the fashion world. I saw the Marc Jacobs collection for Fall/Winter 08/09 – I was appalled. But as for these two fashion controversies, I think Marc's ideas are innovative and direct. It might not be for everyone to own, but it certainly should be something everyone can appreciate.

Fashionable Donations: A Trend towards Giving

John Locke once proclaimed, “Fashion for the most part is nothing but the ostentation of riches”. While many fashionistas today would argue with this proclamation, declaring that fashion is also about beauty and creativity, the general population would most likely agree: especially when they are staring at a $4,000 Gucci handbag sitting in a window display. For the average consumer, most elements of high fashion are regarded as superfluous and unnecessary. On the other hand, these same consumers would most likely agree with Sir Francis Bacon, who once declared: “In charity, there is no excess”. Everyone likes to believe that they are doing something to benefit the world, and donating to charities is one of the easiest ways for people to gain a sense of philanthropic satisfaction. So what happens when a world of extravagance and excess collides with one of humanitarian cause and relentless giving? Recently, the answer seems to be a line of new and trendy merchandise sold at diverse prices, which also fulfill a person’s desire to give back to the world. By combining the influence of fashion and the goodwill of donations, designers have made “giving back” a trendy movement; one which is benefiting both fashion houses and world charities alike.
The most notable combination of fashion and charity today is of course (PRODUCT)RED, a project started by Bono and Bobby Shriver, to raise awareness and money for The Global Fund. Companies like Gap, Emporio Armani, and Converse have branded some of their merchandise with (RED) labels, and they all donate a percentage of the revenue created by selling these products in their stores. The money is then used to purchase anti-retroviral medication and distribute it to impoverished countries in Africa. Giorgio Armani, one of the world’s leading fashion designers, signed on with Bono’s RED campaign in September 2006, when he created a new line for men and women to be sold in all of his 124 Emporio Armani stores across the globe. Armani is contributing an average of 40% of its gross profit margin from its (RED) merchandise directly to the Global Fund. To date, (RED) has contributed 49.8 million dollars to the Global Fund and has provided 1.1 million people with treatment for HIV/AIDS, 2.8 million with treatment for tuberculosis and 23 million with treatment for malaria.
Not only have (RED) products clearly helped people in the world, but it has also done something for fashion. (PRODUCT)RED has created a whole new collection of looks, most notably for Armani’s new designs. In developing his collection, Giorgio Armani teamed up with Ghanaian contemporary artist Owusu-Ankomah, whose art is featured on the clothing, accessories and packaging. The shining red African pictograms give the line something new and different, and they are meant to represent positive, hopeful symbols for the future of Africa; however they simultaneously work as a fashionable status symbol for consumers, as a simple cotton crewneck retails for $85 and a men’s calfskin messenger bag for $395. Armani also collaborated with Julia Roberts to create a bracelet for men ($195) and women ($175) that appears in the line as well. Giorgio Armani says that, “Julia has helped create a beautiful accessory for both men and women, which will also be a visible reminder of the part that we can all play in fighting AIDS in Africa.” Evidently, supporting noble causes has not made designers or fashion companies any less noble in their already-innovative fashion apparel, and other superstar designers are catching on to the new trend as well.
Marc Jacobs and Ralph Lauren are two of America’s hottest designers and they are also devoting a portion of their profits to aid the charitable causes of their choice. In the summer of 2006, Marc Jacobs created a line of fashion tees which retail at $35 to raise awareness about skin cancer. The t-shirts feature celebrities like Victoria Beckham, Heidi Klum (which I am sporting), Naomi Campbell, Hilary Swank, and Marc Jacobs himself posing nude with witty messages like “Protect the Skin You’re In,” “Protect Your Largest Organ,” and “Save Your Ass” covering their private parts. All of the proceeds from these shirts were donated to NYU Interdisciplinary School of Medicine Melanoma Cooperative Group in memory of the late NYU physician Jessie Rubin. The 2006 line of nudie tees reportedly raised about $60,000 for the Melanoma Group, and they still remain available in all Marc by Marc Jacobs stores. Meanwhile, shoppers looking to support a different cause can shop Ralph Lauren’s Pink Pony Collection, which has raised over $300,000 for the National Breast Cancer Center. Lauren explains that, “in poor and minority communities, medically underserved populations suffer disproportionately from cancer because they lack access to basic, quality health care. The Pink Pony Campaign reaches out to these communities and strives to make a difference.” The Pink Pony Collection features apparel for both men (e.g. the $75 Classic Polo) and women (with items ranging from the $45 Tank to the $498 Hooded Cashmere Sweater), making the items a must-have for consumers of any age and any gender.
Even fashion house and mega-million dollar corporation Gucci has decided that charities are a worthy cause for their huge profits. Renewing a program that started in 2005, Gucci once again decided to hold “The Gucci Holiday Campaign to Benefit UNICEF” in 2007. From November 15th through December 31st, Gucci donated 25% of the sales from the special holiday items, personally crafted by Gucci’s Creative Director Frida Giannini, to UNICEF. In addition to the special holiday campaign, the company came out with a special “Gucci for UNICEF” Indy bag that will be sold in stores until December of this year. Just like the rest of the UNICEF items, 25 percent of the revenue generated by this bag goes directly to UNICEF.
Gucci may be the most well known luxury brand to commit themselves to charity work, however they are not alone. Cartier too partnered with eight celebrities in order to design a product in which a percentage of the proceeds will be donated to charity. Their concept is the LOVE Charity Bracelet, and each celebrity has created a different color piece, representing a different charity that will be supported . A few examples of the best-selling bracelets are Sarah Jessica Parker’s blue UNICEF bracelet, Rosario Dawson’s red Youth Aids Bracelet, Liv Tyler’s deep pink Breast Cancer Research Foundation bracelet, and Scarlett Johansson’s baby pink USA Harvest bracelet. The 18-carat white gold with cotton cord bracelet is sold at $475, $100 of which is given to the corresponding charity. Visibly, both Gucci and Cartier’s commitment towards different charities demonstrates that even on the most lavish and extravagant level, charity and fashion still fit together extremely well, and that the classification of members of the fashion world as “superficial, uncaring, label-whores” may not have to continue into the new age of fashion trends.
To end, I want to note that while integrating politics and fashion may have been something to avoid in the past, today it is nothing less than essential. We have made a movement in fashion trends where people do not just want to wear new clothes; they want their clothes to express something about their personality. Many believe that consumers are only buying these “charitable” items so they can participate in guilt-free shopping, and others believe that fashion houses are actually profiting more by donating a small portion of their profits than they would if they did not have these campaigns at all. However, I believe the old proverb to be true: “Charity looks at the need and not at the cause.” Does it really matter if fashion houses profit and consumers have a false sense of philanthropy by purchasing these items, as long as people are getting the help they deserve? True, one could just go donate 2,000 dollars directly to UNICEF instead of purchasing the Gucci handbag, but would UNICEF get all of those donations if it were not for Gucci’s campaign? Probably not. So while this trend for charitable giving might come and go as fast as neon pleather or shoulder pads, I think we should embrace this one while it lasts, because finally the fashion industry may have gotten something right.