As an unmistakable display of artistry and wealth, a Louis Vuitton handbag has long been a loyal companion to women commanding a high sense of sartorial taste and an even higher socioeconomic status. Although the fashion house commands an imperial influence over ready-to-wear and couture runways, the LVMH-owned brand, universally known for its handbags, took root within the luggage industry over 150 years ago.
Founded in 1854, Louis Vuitton opened shop on the Rue Neuve des Capucines in Paris, France, not as an artisan of handbags but, rather, train car trunks. In 1858, Vuitton introduced his flat-topped trunks with Trianon canvas, a material that made the trunks lightweight and airtight. Crafted with a flat, rather than rounded, top, Vuitton’s products were revolutionary in that they were stackable upon train cars roofs. Although the popular rounded top design encouraged water runoff, it hindered the trunks from being stacked, thus limiting storage space above each train car. Easily stackable and unencumbering, Vuitton’s flat top trunks quickly garnered revenue and prestige, inciting numerous other luggage-makers to imitate Vuitton’s style and design. By 1867, the company participated in the universal exhibition in Paris, and then the Chicago World’s Fair in 1893, bringing the design house stateside. Three years later, the company launched the signature LV Monogram, the first designer label, which has since then become the sartorial red flag for wealth and status globally.
But during World War II, the fashion house lost world wide accreditation as it supposedly collaborated with the Nazis during the German occupation of France in the Second World War, according to recently published “Louis Vuitton, A French Saga.” French author Stephanie Bonvicini writes that members of the Vuitton family actively supported Pétain’s puppet government in France, profiting from the government’s dealings with the Germans. Such support and sympathy for Pétain’s regime (the regime which was responsible for the deportation of French Jews to German concentration camps) allowed the design house to survive –and thrive- while a majority of other luxury goods industries were shut down. One particular allegation, although questionable, suggests that the Vuitton family established a factory which produced artifacts glorifying Pétain, including more than 2,500 busts of the leader of the French regime. However, a Louis Vuitton spokesman contends that, “this is ancient history… [it was] a period when it was family-run and long before it became part of LVMH. We are diverse, tolerant and all the things a modern company should be.”
As such a modern company, or empire rather, Louis Vuitton grossed more than 2.5 billion pounds in 2010. Its 314 shops are scattered across 52 countries worldwide. Thus, the LV monogram, inspired from Japanese and Oriental designs in the Late Victorian era, is perhaps as well known -and religiously adored- globally as the Catholic cross.
Therein lies the great debate regarding the LV label: while some abhor the LV monogram and the social strata it flaunts, others covet such brand-labeling. One might also add a third party of wealthy connoisseurs who prefer a LV not for its display of status but rather for its exceptional craftsmanship.
Over Christmas break, I had the exceptional experience of purchasing a Louis Vuitton- (not for myself) but in accompanying a well-to-do friend with her personal Christmas shopping. Upon entering the store, one is taken aback by the explicit luxury Louis Vuitton exemplifies. As expected, we two teenage girls were politely ignored. When my friend approached the attractive salesman behind the counter, he presented us with the LV handbags as if indulging two children. I wanted to remind him that he was a salesman in the mall. When my friend pointed to her Louis of choice, the medium monogramed tote, she simply stated, “I want that one.” He didn’t react until she pulled out her credit card. After a brief moment of eyebrow-raising, he ushered her to the cash register -in a much kindlier manner. As the sales people registered the bag -and the $800 bill- we were graciously offered, “please, take a seat and what would you like to drink in the mean time? Perrier? Figi water?”
After our shopping excursion came to a close, I informed my mother of the instance, to which she quipped, “I cannot condone spending $800 on one bag.” Sure, an 800 to one ratio sounds pretty bad, but I did some calculating: if you buy three shoddily-made purses from Forever 21 every year, for 18 years, it would cost you the equivalent of one Louis Vuitton bag that would last you a lifetime.
Moreover, one Louis Vuitton, as opposed to 54 cheap handbags, is more environmentally conscious. Some consider a Louis V bag an excessive indulgence; some consider it an excellent investment. Nazis or not.
Katelyn Edwards can be reached at katelyn.edwards@spartans.ut.edu.
Loading ...
