FLAUNTING LUXURY

Luxury, the pest that corrupts states, morals and people making them soft and gullible (Livy) and that, according to Goethe, should be left to those that are born in it or to people who neither have nor can have any thoughts, is a human craving forever present along the history of mankind.

Why is that so? It is a question with many answers: the need to be known as belonging to the elite different from the rabble, asserting through certain visible signs that one’s stance is higher… Who knows? But the truth is that the love of luxury is inextinguishable.

Luxury is something that more than three quarters of the world population would like to be able to enjoy while only a very little percentage can afford it. And the gap between one group and the other is very wide.

People belonging to the last group, the very wealthy ones, have the right to know what the market has to offer, where to get it and how much is going to cost to satisfy their whims and to inform them there are lots of specialized magazines. It is perfectly all right and If the rest of mortals want to have a look and buy them, O.K too; what I do not find correct, in fact I find it obscene, is Sunday magazines that come free with newspapers making an apology of luxury, even less in the present times when unemployment is high, wages low and life a constant struggle to survive for the majority of individuals around the world.

How do they dare to publish the price of crocodile bags, boa constrictor boots or watches that cost at least a year’s salary (the lucky enough to have a job) as if everybody was able to buy them and advice to scape to some exotic island (like Laamu, south of Maldivas; or Ko Samui and Ko PHangan, Thay resorts) where each night at hotels listed as paradises cost a fortune?

It is infuriating to know thanks to YO donna (the Saturday “El Mundo” free magazine) that there is a waiting list of about eighteen months to buy the “Kelly” Hermes bag (from 6.000 up to 30.000 euros) and almost three to get a pair of shoes “Pigalle” by Louboutin (from 765 euros)…

Flaunting luxury is not always only in bad taste, in certain circumstances it is despicable too and to wave it in front of the economically week is uncharitable as well.

I do not believe like John Home that “luxury may probably contribute to give bread to the poor; but if there were no luxury, there would be no poor”. What I want to stress is that is not appropriated to publish items that should be kept where they belong, where they do not.

Responder

Introduce tus datos o haz clic en un icono para iniciar sesión:

Logo de WordPress.com

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de WordPress.com. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Imagen de Twitter

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Twitter. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Foto de Facebook

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Facebook. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Google+ photo

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Google+. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Conectando a %s