Isnt it interesting that a fashion blog can unleash such a deep rooted philosophical discussion on values, perception and meaning? - 'fashion' that is so often dismissed as something superficial by so many so called intellectuals? I think that in itself is a great example of how we can invest or deplete a concept or idea with meaning - soo agree with Zap's example of how diamonds or fashion can be construed as science or something totally inconsequential.

Pondering over Una's original question as to why we would invest meaning, I can think of two possibilities:
1. Its really our own unending ability (that is intrinsic to each one of us) to dig so deep in a subject that we can actually understand the interconnectedness of everything, or just dismiss it as something totally random and of insignificant value.
2. We like to fill impersonal objects around us with personal stuff - such as feelings, memories, hope, satisfaction - so we feel more alive, secure and also more in control (much more successfully than we could probably achieve with other human beings)

Where we choose to invest this energy of digging deep or expanding ourselves into inanimate, metaphysical realities depends on our age, background, social context etc etc.

Isnt that what the branding game all about? To expand the meaning of a 'name' to include as much of the consumer's emotional and cultural world as possible? I remember this research study we did for the design of a fridge - it included showing people, random images that invoked different emotions for them, when they envisioned what a fridge meant to them. This was reverse engineering at its finest - get the emotions first and then fill it back with the current cultural context - into the design of the fridge!

Oh just to add to Una's question about 'How can I be aware of the internal dialog and still buy a Burberry scarf" - Una I think that would take a highly self aware,(almost at Buddha level) kind of person to be able to separate subconsious influences from practical decisions(that are universally good for the self and the world) - so for now I am just happy to be a result of my influences and world, happily succumb to wanting a Burberry scarf - or buying gold and diamonds because it gives me financial security (The Indian take on why one should stock up on them)!

Whoa, love the way this discussion caught fire! And I now have to sleep so I can be at work at 6 am but will read and appreciate each and every response tomorrow... Yawn!

Lets see, the original question was what attracted me to a designer? I went through, in my head, all the really big designers but found none that appealed to me. But then I hit upon Ralph Lauren. That appeals to me. Now why? I like the style. I like the tomboyish, western, nostalgic feeling he portrays in his designs. He has just enough bling and not too much. His women protray a power not usually established by overt sexiness. His clothes, mostly, look wearable for the regular person. So therefor, when I have the chance I check out Ralph stores.

Until recently, in Norway, ralph lauren was not a label that would have been recognized. So I don't think I was buying Ralph for the recognition factor, of others. But I do feel a little extra cool wearing what I know is a designer item. And that is purely for the fact that his label is on it. Not because the quality is better than another top of the same kind. I feel part of his vision, and can associate myself with those gorgeous total outfits that I cannot afford nor fit.

I have no real knowledge of his background, or whether he represents an ethical stance on any topic. It is fashion, and the fashion he represents, that I support when I buy his pieces. I am happy to see his brand and other AMerican labels are now established in Norway.

"The price of things is what people are willing to pay for them".

Just my 2 cents. I've been loyal to some brands in the past, but don't have any that I currently covet. I'm not a fan of Burberry tan, but if I saw a coat that clicked all my boxes that happened to be a Burberry, I'd pounce. I am tempted by the red pattern of my tartan pants every time I see it. It is the exact pattern I had on my lunch box as a child. Different isn't better or worse, just different.

You guys are all so interesting!
I do have a few designer items- one I would wear and one I don't, and one I thrifted purely to on-sell for its label.
The one I wear I have fallen in love with not just for the label:
The fabric, workmanship and unique-ness are the appeal.
The item I probably won't use (a bag) I am cleaning and may keep to 'look-at' or may sell at some point.
So for me it is more than just the label- to wear and enjoy it must be practical as well as beautiful.

Just loving this discussion, meta and otherwise.

The only brand I buy because of its brand image is Fabindia. To my generation they made ready-to-weae Indian garments cool and accessible at the same time. As opposed to one-size-fits-all frump and the hassles of dealing with a tailor or the impossibility of getting pearl buttons or coconut shell at the haberdashery store to go with khadi fabrics for home sewn garments. This also represents a tribal generational shift of ethical/intellectual/feminist tribal values... there are still contemporary intellectuals who sneer at Fabindia feminists who have failed to leave behind the frail shackles of fashion.

But other than that I don't have many brand associations. Benetton and Levis were cool once upon the 80s. Now... they are just clothes with minor nostalgia associations.

However, I have... issues?... when it comes to Rolex. Partly reaction against parental aspirational values re luxury watch brands. Partly issues to do with coming out of my mother's shadow. Partly it has lovey-dovey mummy associations. And romance since it was a wedding gift from dad to mum. I love it. She gave it to me as a graduation gift. But I hardly wear it. It includes the problem of looking like I would spend money on a luxury watch without being rich... so like a wannabe?

PS: I love thinking about thinking.

Pps: l hate the associations of the word 'exclusive'

ManidipaM, I also really dislike the associations of the word 'exclusive.'

And speaking of thinking about thinking, there are studies that have found evidence suggesting that people receive more pleasure from more expensive goods, simply based on price:

"Despite the pervasive influence of marketing, very little is known about how neural mechanisms affect decision-making, the researchers said. "Here, we propose a mechanism through which marketing actions can affect decision-making," they write. "We hypothesized that changes in the price of a product can influence neural computations associated with EP." Because perceptions about quality are positively correlated with price, the scholars argued that someone might expect an expensive wine to taste better than a cheaper one. Their hypothesis went further, stipulating that a person's anticipated experience would prompt higher activity in the part of the brain that experiences pleasure, the medial orbitofrontal cortex, or mOFC, in the forehead.

Shiv, a native of India, said he decided to study wine because so many people, especially in the Golden State, are crazy about it. "I'm just fascinated with wine," he said. "It has always amused me how much time and effort people put into this hobby. I couldn't understand it until I moved to California and started appreciating the whole thing. But, in the back of my mind, the price variation in wines has always puzzled me. You can go from spending $4 to $200 to $300 and up a bottle. Why are people going for that? Some are trying to show off, but most people are not. They are very serious about it, and they think that the more expensive it is, the better it is. That has always befuddled me. Is it really that people are getting more pleasure from it? Or do they just think so?"

News Release on the full article and study: http://news.stanford.edu/pr/20.....11608.html

I find this so interesting and amusing, but also a bit scary: "Shiv has shown that people who paid a higher price for an energy drink, such as Red Bull, were able to solve more brain teasers than those who paid a discounted price for the same product."

Claudia, I am with you. Plain scary. So I didn't imagine it when I thought paying more for a garment gave me more confidence when donning it than if I bought it on sale?

Like the placebo effect but on self confidence. Or wine appreciation as the case may be. But if people are really getting better, feeling better, enjoying the wine more is it a bad thing?

Yes, actually the placebo effect is common in almost everything. In randomized and controlled studies, placebos are as effective as anti-depressants for people with mild to moderate depression. People get drunk/act drunk when they THINK a punch is spiked - even when it isn't. The power of perception is often greater than the power of actual medications with side effects. Many alternative medicines work (as far as we can tell) simply because people BELIEVE they will work. And if that is the case, is it any wonder that people believe - often on a subconscious level - that certain material items can make them look better, feel better or feel more confident?

You cracked me up about the diamonds. I feel the same way. Originally diamonds were important because they are the strongest thing on earth and could cut through anything...but most of us don't need that superhero ability. : )

Your comments resonate with me. For me the only thing that would be close would be an original Missoni print. I can't explain it. SHRUG.

I do love Burberry, but not necessarily the checks themselves. Their trenches are just amazingly made.

Silly me. Logged reply twice.

Catching up with this discussion again and thinking it through some more. I think I am attracted to the Dior, Chanel & Burberry fashion houses because of the impeccable design and quality. I find it beautiful. Good design makes me happy and it also feeds my fantasy life desires (saving the world by day and wearing Dior gowns to the ball at night). There are many TED talks that I have watched about design and why it makes us happy. Here is one..
http://www.ted.com/talks/don_n.....otion.html

I think I am the type that is attracted to beauty on a visceral level. A few weeks ago I was shopping for a bike pump for my son. There was a black one with bright green letters and a more expensive one that was all aluminum with a carved wood handle. I had to tell myself that it was a bike pump and buy the black one but I wanted to the aluminum one. I wanted to feel the sleek handle in my hand and the smooth aluminum body. It made me want to own it because it was beautiful...and this is a bike pump we are talking about!

@shevia wrote: "Like the placebo effect but on self confidence. Or wine appreciation as the case may be. But if people are really getting better, feeling better, enjoying the wine more is it a bad thing?"

On some level I do think this can be a bad thing when it comes to the marketing of material goods, especially those of conspicuous consumption. The placebo effect used in medical science in controlled double blind studies is to demonstrate if a medicine is actually beneficial (more effective than the placebo) as a treatment, the good outweighs any potential harm. In product marketing it can be used to manipulate people, create an entire economic culture or belief system that empties a person's wallet and errodes bank accounts over time, which can be a very harmful "side effect."

Thank you, Claudia, for illuminating why I get so conflicted about those labels, logos, and brands. After having succumbed to the concept of "impeccable design and quality" as my rationale, along with more than dash of "woohoo, see what I have!", I've also felt the sneaking suspicion that my thrill had some PR/marketing/sales executive smirking in the shadows.

Now, don't misinterpret me here, because I'm not saying that wanting (and buying) well-known designer labels needs to be defended in any way. Our choices about what delights us, or brings us happiness, are entirely our own, regardless of how another person might choose to judge them. We are not alike, so why would we assume we ought make the same choices?

But I also think it is important to be aware our feelings and impulses don't just exist in a vacumn. As you've pointed out, Claudia, we participate in an economic system that depends on calculated manipulation to influence our perceptions and buying habits. For that reason, I do think that we ought to be at least willing to contemplate our motives and rationales for choosing "value-added" branding costs. If I'm being totally honest, that contemplation might have been helpful in reducing some of the mixed feelings I've had when I contemplate some of my past splurges, especially the ones that lost their lustre rather quickly once the thrill of possession dimmed.

This is really interesting.

MaryK - I understand. Sometimes when I read a comment I think that it may have been more conducive to an open discussion if the writer had included "imo" rather than making a blanket statement but I guess that's just my opinion

Claudia I couldn't agree more. The question I always ask myself is would I love this if it didn't have a label? I'm not sure of my ability to separate the two things but it is my attempt to temper the hype surrounding labels & it has made me concentrate more on fabric quality, workmanship & cut.

Caro, I also giggle when somebody posts something like "IN MY OPINION, all people who wear visible name brands do so because they are shallow and want people to know how much money they have! My opinion only, of course!" In my view, that's just as bad.

I think Angie has totally mastered it, as displayed in her adorable condemnation of wearing gear (workout wear) in public in this thread: http://youlookfab.com/welookfa.....ker-styles. Note that she says "I have an intolerance for people wearing gear," and goes on to describe the thing for which she has an intolerance without casting aspersions about the people who do it. See also here: http://youlookfab.com/welookfa.....ashionable