Longboard wrote:I think many
Longboard said:
I think many people choose the brand and logo for it's implied status, that's why I go out of my way to avoid it, whether the lable makes shoes or not. My kids went to an up-scale suburban high school, and the brand conscousness made me sick! Again, for me it's got nothing to do with whether or not the company makes footwear, but my own little attempt to refuse to participate in a status game.
I couldn't agree more. I had to go to a posh school for years and be talked down by wearing cheap, unbranded clothing, shoes or even by the bag to carry my books. I'm particularly conscious since then, but against such smut, filthy mentality and social pornography. It also makes me so sick just to think of it, I couldn't have described it better than you.
Apart from that, the look of all those brands showing up (I also include laptops, automobiles and any other stuff that) is furthest from discretion, sobriety or elegance (that is neither synonymous of high price nor good quality, also crap can even be elegant), some of the best attributes the art of design can attain, but rather it is obscene, of a very tacky taste, what kitsch should really mean.
On the other hand, I don't have nothing against good quality products, but I will use them and pay for them for that quality, not because they are more or less expensive or they are associated with a high social status. I always try to remove brands when they have been simply sewed, and when it exceeds the limit of what I find tolerable, I just don't buy it, even if it is otherwise of very good quality and very suitable to me. The only brands I can can occasionally wear without feeling too embarrassed are completely unknown ones or those white brands made by store chains like Decathlon, mainly sport wear.
All those companies should learn that they can't treat their customers like a whore (nothing personal against them, they shouldn't be treated like that either) using them like living advertisements.