This collage (if you can't tell) may not be as good as JR (who in my humble opinion does the most amazing collages), so just blame my photoshop skills.

I can never seem to understand the world's obsession over monograms, especially one with the letters "L" and "V" accompanied with flowers and what not. I think it's amazing how Marc Jacobs keeps on reinventing the monogram and the bags, as seen from the SS10 show which I think instead of models, bags should be put on conveyer belts and travel down the runway. It was practically a bag show. Come on, I don't think anyone was interested in the clothes (which I thought was ridiculously "cute", but I shan't hate it because of Marc.) More so of the bags, which has created plenty of buzz among the blogosphere (Bryanboy I'm talking 'bout you).

I can never seem to understand the world's obsession over monograms, especially one with the letters "L" and "V" accompanied with flowers and what not. I think it's amazing how Marc Jacobs keeps on reinventing the monogram and the bags, as seen from the SS10 show which I think instead of models, bags should be put on conveyer belts and travel down the runway. It was practically a bag show. Come on, I don't think anyone was interested in the clothes (which I thought was ridiculously "cute", but I shan't hate it because of Marc.) More so of the bags, which has created plenty of buzz among the blogosphere (Bryanboy I'm talking 'bout you).

If I'm not wrong, or that I'm hallucinating about Marc Jacobs (which shouldn't be because I only hallucinate about Riccardo, Miuccia and Rei), I remember him saying something that when one buys an expensive product, they want everyone to know. Hence the monograms.

Not that I hate the bags completely (there are some nice bag shapes and the Stephen Sprouse Graffiti is cute), I believe that one should not buy products simply because of the brand and the monograms printed on the leather. I mean out of 10 people, 7 would buy luxury products as a kind of 'victory prize', or a way to show off. And out of the 7, all are label whores. I'm not kidding. In Singapore, you see housewives in their 40s and 50s wearing what would be the crappiest piece of clothing and you see them carrying a Louis Vuitton bag. I mean, does a branded bag mean more than anything. The monograms are.....bordering on boring (woah that somehow rhymes) and the most common seen LV bags are actually pretty much bleh. The best bags coming out from the house of LV are probably from the runway collections. But even still, I think LV bags are ridiculously overpriced. Even a scarf can cost a thousand bucks, a keyring a few hundred bucks, hello I thought Hermes only sold their silk scarves for around 300 bucks.

I think the Chloe Paraty bag is a great example of luxury bag that sells because of the material and design behind it, and not because of monograms (and maybe that applies to most Chloe bags and some other brands). It's one of the few things that Hannah MacGibbon has done right with Chloe.

I simply do not see the point of carrying a branded bag because of the monograms/brand or as a means of showing off, but I guess LVMH knows that this is the only way for them to be the richest luxury conglomerate and Louis Vuitton to be the most successful luxury house. Bags do make the most profit for most luxury houses. Bleh.