- Considerations of "Modern life"
- Creative writing
- Joie de vivre
- New York City
- The law
I just wasted a good chunk of time scouring for IHT Heritage Lux (pretty good) conference tweets and articles rather than reading up on the 4th Amendment and its relevant case laws. Here is a good one (also, Nowness is the greatest). My favorite blogger, Stylebubble, also provides a more informal and personal overview.
Anyway, it occurs to me that this could be a potentially interesting area in the future, for me anyway. I am obsessed with how fashion and luxury companies choose to approach this market of up and coming consumers. This is not to say I have better answers but I can be critical. Though it does occur to me that the demands of a Chinese consumer are exclusive of what brands should aim to do in general, which is to say that the heritage is merely a foundation from which you can more easily launch innovations (because you already have authenticity, credibility, and all that in place). The issue with some luxury houses could be encapsulated with how they approach handbag designs for example. Some brands rely too heavily on a trademark/name where it should be giving you liberty to exploit creative license. You start with a canvas of monogram perhaps to be reimagined, it doesn’t and shouldn’t have to end in a generic form that does nothing but to serve as a vehicle for the trademark. In that scenario, I just think that the focus on it is entirely skewed. It’s presumptuous to think all brands can be revived simply by name. As much as the name can’t be divorced from the product, the name is not the product. Burberry is a good example of this, but maybe I’ve just a bit of crush on Angela Ahrendts. Perfect balance between business acumen and reconnaissance of design and creativity.