Champagne Tastes? Spinoff from MyHabit has Venettinis

debsey

Fri, Aug 22 2014, 5:31 pm

I don't mean to sound like an old-fashioned person who starts every sentence with "in my day....," but when did this whole "champagne tastes" thing become so prevalent in the frum community?
I'm shopping with my high school girls for shoes, school-bags, etc, and everyone in their class wants brand names. Marc Jacobs bag, Michele watch, designer shoes......
I'm not the type to make a point on my kid's back, so I let them chip in their own money if they want something high-end (I'm not just BUYING it without them contributing) and I'm OK with letting my daughter spend her entire budget on two sweaters (if she'd rather wear the same two sweaters than have a few that are from a less desirable brand, fine with me)
So I'm not so much deploring the trend as wondering how it started? When I was a kid, we wanted to look trendy and good, but I don't recall this emphasis on BRANDS.
(Or is this only a Lakewood/Brooklyn/Monsey thing?)
debsey

amother

Fri, Aug 22 2014, 6:03 pm

Its an intressting question, and im not sure, I just know that there is a definite preoccupation woyh brand names in lakwood. (Not to say all of lakewood, and everyone, bit it is def prevalent) my sister the same age as your daughter, ib a regular brooklyn school, who is not nerdy or anything, would have no such hasagos. when I was on camp growing up (im in my mid 20s) all the lakewood girls had the ralf lauren "horse" oxford shirts, even the rebbes daughters, while most of us brooklyn, who considered ourselves with it and in towners, did not think to hav such expensive shirts. We had tshirats from old navy and elzee lol. My point is, I dont think its a new thing, maybe it started when lakewood changed from being a total yeshiva town, and thw girls from lakewood families felt like they have to prove thwmselves. Like we are yeshivish, but we get it.. Not fact, just a thought..

zaq

Fri, Aug 22 2014, 7:26 pm

I think you may be suffering from reversebyopia, my just-coined term for being just a little blind when it comes to things past. Back in the day (I'm old enough to be amother's mother) there were brand names that "everyone" wanted, too. I have zero recall as to what those brands were, since I myself did not possess them. Mine was the generation that started with the mishegoss of wearing designer labels outside one's clothing. It started with jeans, IIRC, and spread to shirts, shoes, bags and everything else. Maybe that's when the extreme emphasis on brands started--when you could actually read the brand on the garment as it was being worn? Used to be "class" meant the quality of the garment speaks for itself and you might recognize a couture garment by the expert tailoring details. Used to be "crass" meant letting someone see the label.

Is the materialism and conspicuous consumption worse now than ever? Possibly, but it's certainly nothing new.

FranticFrummie

Fri, Aug 22 2014, 10:13 pm

Things are cyclical. In the Victorian times, everything had to come from Paris, or it was "old fashioned". La Mode was the style book of the day, and women read it voraciously and copied all the latest frills.

More recently, the 60's were very "anti materialistic" as a fashion statement. It was in the 70's push back against that style that brought in the designer label awareness. Sasson jeans, Gloria Vanderbilt wrap dresses, Member's Only satin jackets. Oh lord, does anyone else remember that madness?

IMHO, it's only gotten worse from there, with each decade vying to outdo the label mania of the decade before it. "Grunge" was only a blip on the radar, and never completely caught on outside of the Pacific Northwest.

Now reality TV stars and rap singers have to have their own brands, and the class distinctions keep getting finer and finer tuned. Everything you wear is supposed to speak volumes about who and what you are.

B'H, my tween DD's only requirement for clothing is that it doesn't slow her down when she's playing, and that the tags don't itch! Very Happy

freidasima

Sat, Aug 23 2014, 2:13 pm

Frantic, I can tell you firsthand that in the 60s the MO girls were often very materialistic in certain circles, while not in others...so it didn't start in the 70s all over but existed before.

The difference was that in the really frum circles 40 and 50 years ago meaning those who were somewhere between the average MO but not necessarily totally BY, there was often not much money and there was no concept of brands or even certain styles. But there definitely was in the school I went to and I remember being one of two or three girls in the class where our families either didn't have money or weren't about to put it out dressing 5th and 7th grade girls in designer clothes. While these girls would wear the holiday dresses to school after yuntif, we would just wear school clothes and save our yuntif like clothes for yuntif. Our values were different and we banded together because the other girls would often look at us as if we were lowlife because we dressed simply and weren't into brand names.

So nothing new under the sun unfortunately debsey....

Reality

Sat, Aug 23 2014, 9:44 pm

I didn't read the other thread but I don't think venettinis are a good example. I bought my girls these shoes last year on sale for about $50. They lasted the entire year. By June, they had holes on the bottom. Please tell me another brand for cheaper that will last that long? My girls will not wear sneakers to school.

By the way, I agree with OP. I think it is dumb to waste money on brand name clothes that are just a "name" but really a piece of junk. But the venettinis really last and are really comfortable. Let's pick on juicy etc...

spinkles

Sat, Aug 23 2014, 10:26 pm

The brand name thing is my pet peeve, and I resisted the Venettinis for several years. But my girls convinced me to buy them last year on sale and I have to admit the loafers (not the oxfords) lasted really well. My older daughter is giving her Venettini loafers to my younger daughter and they look practically brand new. So I realized it's actually saving money, because before I was buying one $30 pair of shoes at Marshalls in the fall and another pair in the middle of winter when the first pair wore out.

debsey

Sat, Aug 23 2014, 10:47 pm

chana_f wrote:

True, sometimes brand names are better quality. I once got Kipling bags for my girls at Daffy's (remember Daffy's?) for like 29.99, and they were selling in stores for over 100.00. Those bags are STILL in mint condition, five years later. So I'm not necessarily saying there's anything wrong with looking for great quality (and if we're talking high end, girl's designer shoes come WAY more high-end than Venittini!)
I was thinking about it because there were handbags on sale on MyHabit (when I logged on to buy the Venettinis) and I recognized one my friend's daughter had just brought over to show my daughter as her new schoolbag. On MyHabit, it was over 200.00, and if this girl got it in the mall, it must have been significantly more. Now, I know this girl's mother, and she's like me - "Honey, if you want to blow half your salary from being a counselor for two year olds on a handbag, be my guest. I'll chip in the 40.00 I was going to spend on your backpack. You realize you had to change a LOT of dirty diapers for that handbag....." In the hopes that she'll make better decisions with her money when she realizes how ridiculous this is.
My question is, where and when did this trend start? Why is this girl SO excited over a "must have" bag that she has to run to her friends to show it off (in a nice, friendly way, not snobby or exclusive at all - like I said - she's a nice kid) and the amount of squealing that went on....It's a HANDBAG, not your engagement ring. Sheesh........

FranticFrummie

Sun, Aug 24 2014, 6:18 am

freidasima wrote:

Frantic, I can tell you firsthand that in the 60s the MO girls were often very materialistic in certain circles, while not in others...so it didn't start in the 70s all over but existed before.

I wasn't in those circles back then, so I didn't really know much about that. I grew up in California, the land of hippies. "Anti-fashion" fashion was all the rage then. Lots of peasant dresses, Birkenstock sandals, macrame jewelry, stuff like that. (I still secretly love all of that, and I miss hanging out at the Grateful Dead shows.) Wink

zaq

Sun, Aug 24 2014, 9:47 am

FranticFrummie wrote:

Well, Birkenstock is a brand name, and not a cheap one. Ditto Doc Martens.

PinkFridge

Sun, Aug 24 2014, 10:11 am

Freidasima, we have similar experiences. There were a few girls who looked like they stepped straight out of Seventeen, including one whose parents owned a department store, others who shopped at the "it" shop, but it didn't put pressure on the rest of us. The feeling was, oh, that's nice, let's move on.

I realize this is a spinoff from the shoes, but a word about the shoes: I'm not sure about the quality of the lower end, I don't want this to become a referendum about the brand, but I do see them a LOT in our OOT school. It could be that the lower end shoes, which I suspect our local vendor specializes in, aren't that much more expensive than some other shoes, and there's the convenience factor of going to this basement.

Scrabble123

Sun, Aug 24 2014, 10:42 am

chana_f wrote:

That is actually very interesting, as Venetinnis are often a piece of junk. I know children who have a beautiful step who have issues with Venetinnis. I have some shoes for 10+ years and Venetinnis would not last me (they are too wide anyways ). Maybe try buying cheaper shoes, because Venetinnis are NOT better quality so your girls may do just fine with those too (and you would be saving money)!

Scrabble123

Sun, Aug 24 2014, 10:45 am

I grew up with brands, but I didn't know what brands were. My classmates all had brands, but it wasnt discussed in my private school. I'm not getting into the wealth aspect, but I believe that people with new money or no money are much more into discussing brands.

I got a new Kipling twice a year (rolling for school and shoulder for day camp). I don't even know what other bags the children had. No one discussed it. My parents bought me Kipling because it was a good sturdy, reliable brand. They use to buy my juicy clothing too, until it was sold to a public company and became less classy and made cheaply. I had several Chanel suits and shoes, but that did not mean anything to me. I didn't look at what others were wearing, the kids didn't discuss it, and I'm sure they don't remember what I was wearing either!