| |
|
Whoops, must go on. I'm assuming, by the way, that you're talking about Gucci/Prada bags and the like, but really it doesn't matter.
If they were made for free, then they would lose the value that people place on them, i.e. street cred, status ect, wouldn't they? Hermès Kelly and Birkin bags aren't known merely for the quality, it is the amount they cost and the likehood of obtaining one that makes them so desirable and sought after. Do you remember the "Sex and the city" episode where Samantha tried to buy one?
Again, this reënforces my belief that in order for people to obtain status in society, they need to own one of these bags.
If you mean that the purpose of these bags is to raise somebody's social status, well, maybe in part. Certainly you're right that much of their cachet lies in their expense, but they also hold stuff. To reiterate, maybe some people buy knockoffs because they like the way the bags look but don't want to pay a ridiculously high price for one, because *shock horror* they don't care if their bag raises their social status but instead just want something to carry things around in?
Of course, because a significant part of these bags' appeal is their expense, I'm sure that lots of people are buying knockoffs so that it looks like they can afford the real thing. So what? Can you honestly tell me that you can't understand why somebody might possibly want to appear as if they have more money than they actually do?
Okay, so you say that these bags reinforce the link between money/possessions/social status. (Symptom of would probably more accurate, but fair enough.) You then denounce people who can't afford them for daring to appear as if they can. Does that not seem a tad bit hypocritical to you?
These bags come with psychological strings attached.
Everybody does not automatically see things the same as you.
It seems like the heart of your idea is that you dislike the link between money and social status. This is fine, I agree with that and I'm sure most if not all people on the board feel roughly the same way. However, denouncing people who don't have money but who aspire to have it or to appear as if they have it is probably not the best way to go about criticizing materialism. I'm really trying not to be snarky here, but man, listen to what you're saying. |
|
|
