Once in a blue moon, the sig. other and I will brave the wait for a table at Din Tai Fung Dumpling House. On a normal weekend, a typical wait to get seated will take up to an hour, so we’ll usually go on mornings when we wake up early enough to beat the mad rush.
There’s really no good reason for it–it’s certainly not the cheapest place, but there are a few dishes we enjoy (*cough* fresh, bite-sized juicy pork dumplings made right there *cough* green beans cooked just perfect) and so we’ll savor food at that place, the only United States mainstay of the Taiwanese dumpling chain.
The pictures, while delectable-looking, mislead. Let me say, before I go any further, that this post isn’t about food. It’s about people-watching. And we were right in the middle of the Asian American suburbia equivalent of a Manhattan intersection. The hour’s wait, while allowing us to wax fish frying in the San Gabriel sun, allowed me to rudely observe with huge amounts of dismay the fashions of the area. I correct myself: I mean “fashion,” as in singular.
As if Los Angeles needs another fashion critic. I must be more specific. This small brain of mine was able to gather only one trend because it was absolutely everywhere–thus continuously adding to my appalled state. How could one not notice, except if completely either: 1) unaware or, 2) accepting of this particular cultural norm?
The monogrammed purses and handbags, girls. They were everywhere. It was so prevalent during that point in time, that spotting such letters on totes has been engrained within me permanently, now. Ugh. Every woman coming out of that dumpling house had one. Every one. I would go so far as to say that 90% of the women who walked out of there had a bag with one or two letters repeated and printed all over the outside panels of their handbag. Mothers. Grandmothers. Teenagers. Twenty-somethings, and thirty-somethings.
And now, in order of frequency (with #3 being a distant third):
1) “LV” (Louis Vuitton)
2) “C” (Coach, not Chanel)
3) “F” (Fendi)
Admittedly, handbags are one of those “must-have” items because you can mix and match them with outfits–even more than shoes. And, they probably serve the highest level of utility in a wardrobe. So yes, spending more money on the durability and “fetchingness” of a bag than a top, for example, makes sense.
I found it especially peculiar, however, that these monogrammed bags were mixed with every level of fashion. (How do you say, e*star?) I mean, the purse I carry is a black one, and I will still forbiddingly wear neutrals with it–so I’m not talking about matchy-matchy. I’m talking about half-expecting a girl wearing blue hospital scrubs walk out while carrying a brown-and-tan monogrammed handbag, when that handbag costs over five times what mine cost me (Cole Haan on eBay, duh), and carries one-fifth as much stuff .
Do you remember Guess jeans? I still remember how coveted that triangle on the middle of our right cheeks was. Guess jeans back then were a whopping $65. How’s that for an ’80s-to early-90’s-priced-monogram? So does this mean that the bar on the monogrammed-necessity has been raised from $65 to over (non-inflation-adjusted) $600? Such a high price to not become the unfashionable nerd at “school” nowadays.
Well. And then came a revelation:
“How many of these bags were fake?”
As if the people were the only ones “Made in China.” Hah. And hey–if you have a fake one, I applaud you for getting a “good deal” on fooling the others. I, for one, can’t tell.
And then I wondered, Is it really worth it to pay full price for a real one anymore? Or does owning a real one effectively keep the Authenticity Police at bay? (And, where do these Authenticity Police set up their Fashion Traps? How much does a violation cost?) And the real, burning question:
“Does a monogram [or brand] equate taste?”
What’s in a logo, folks? I cannot fathom paying over five Benjamins to a multi-million dollar company so that I could advertise for them. Shouldn’t they be paying you to carry them around? It’s advertising!! The shortcut to “taste” seems mighty expensive to me.
What if you applied the “free T-shirt principle” to the concept? You just couldn’t. If you’re wearing a free T-shirt and wearing their logo or company name everywhere, thereby advertising for a company for free, at least part of the deal of the whole thing was, “Hey, the T-shirt was free.”
I found it especially amusing while noticing when three different girls were carrying exactly the same LV bag, because like, LV makes probably 20 total shapes, maximum, of their monogrammed bags. Oh yeah. That is truly worth spending the Bens … so that you could increase your odds on sharing the exact same “good taste” with the next brand-touting girl.
Perhaps good taste just enjoys company, in some respects? And then there’s also the “Prom dress principle.” Whatever happened to a girl’s worst fear being, for instance, Showing up to The Prom and finding two other girls are wearing the exact same dress? Don’t the monogrammed bags merely increase those chances??
Honestly, to me, it’s just baffling. And your explanations are welcome. I’m always open to the sense getting slapped into me. I have my own fashion “indulgences,” as you may already know.
(By the way, if your “C’s” and “Coach’s” are colored puce and green, that’s a [too big] indicator it’s definitely fake.)
Love,
*e
For the hottest monogrammed bags in The San Gabriel Valley, visit:
18 Comments
there are so many fake LV’s ummm its not worth it to buy real ones, i dont think.
I think thats why then they go to the ultra level (ones with cherry’s on them) they cost so and so much more! but does cherry really exude luxury?
personally im more into the flat black regular look…i like Ferragamo (did i even spell it right) LOL
i really wonder about what makes a purse so expensive, i mean–oh well. i’ll just keeping it as a mystery. well put, as usual, e*.
din tai fung is expensive! the last time i went the AC was on “frozen” and the bao’s were becoming lukewarm when they arrive to our table. sigh, they are good though.
but not for the price. the “asian” frugal side of me cringes whenever i think about the place.
there cannot really be such a thing as gourmet asian dining? namely, tradition? it seems contradictory. i fondly associate asian dining and enjoying a huge meal with a plethora of dishes at a really cheap price!
Dear, I can alway spot a fake. It’s just a talent that I have. So, I do not advocate carrying said offense in my presence. I think I’m about 99.9% always right. I could give classes on how to spot a fake. There are good ones out there, so if a girl can get a good one, kudos. But there are some really bad fakes out there…..I like your bag anyway. V cute.
Haha, wehoroy, I would NEVER question your judgment! Thanks, I’m relieved you like my handbag.
You are now the official Authenticity Police.
juicy pork dumplings ARE magic bags. :9
man, i was actually hoping this was a food post.
How to dress asian…1)expensive bag, 2)expensive shoes, 3)nothing esle matters.
Remember kids, you’re only as well dressed as your worst piece of clothing.
jimmiwin….u are SO right! However, I think you’re only joking, but I do prescribe to that theory…. hahahha
Tliao: In due time… In due time.
wehoroy/jimmiwin: hmmmmm *looking around* damn I think I have holes in my fruit of the looms! or is it the worst piece of clothing people can SEE! :PPPP
That’s tough with me…can’t decide if its my cheap shirts, pants, socks, watches…. :PPPPPPP ok im a dork
hahaha…no they werent….i dont think they have a sprinkles out in AZ…but who knows…
My high maintenance cousin paid $500 for a bag which was basically made of plastic which I could’ve probably built.
Maybe the post wasn’t meant to be about food, but you now have me positively obsessing about dim sum.
Without a doubt, there is a fair amount of marketing + branding involved with handbags. Its exploded to a multi-billion dollar market dominated by the Gucci Group and LVMH (http://stocks.us.reuters.com/stocks/overview.asp?symbol=LVMH.PA). As long as their is demand…
Nevertheless, brand bashing is just that brand bashing. Would you drop 2 benjamins for Oakley sunglasses? Why. Can’t you get other sunglasses for cheaper? Would you drop 5 benjamins (or whatever amount) for Burton gear? Why? Can’t you get other gear for cheaper?
I would say at this point we have no idea what the actual COG for LV is. But, I bet if its made in Italy there is some labor and design costs involved - although not as high as what they are sold at. Although, I don’t have an LV bag, I am sure an original has some measure of quality/design that other bag makers have a hard time reproducing:
I’m one to criticize, but I’d usually wisen up and say: to each their own. Let them spend their disposable income th way they want too.
On the topic of fake bags - my belief is that if you can’t afford it, don’t buy fake. What in the world urges people to front as though they can afford it.
Thanks for visiting, Anonymous!
I completely agree with you: to let people spend their disposable income as they please–I could never disagree with that.
However, I also believe in one’s right to describing peculiarities in how people actually do this, while forming social commentary (and why I, myself, wouldn’t do as they do)–would you agree?
It’s funny because you mention Burton Snowboards, and it just happens to be that I would never buy a Burton Snowboard! In fact, I happen to really favor Rome boards, which is a company started by unsatisfied Burton ex-employees. I tend to think, too, that Burton Snowboards are overpriced–but yes, they CAN be, because they’ve built up that marketability, just as LV has. In reality, just “personally”-speaking, having snowboarded for a few seasons now, I cannot really justify spending over $250 for a snowboard–seeing as how I would like to also spend money on a pow board if I already have a park board, or a park board if I already have a long pow board.
This is interesting, and you bring up interesting points–because I could also rephrase this whole post simply as … my placing less value than others on whatever “marketability” a certain brand name has built up for themselves, and therefore deciding to not seek out a bag of that particular brand. Mind you–a bag simply of the LV brand but NOT having the monogram all over it, I would actually value more than the ones WITH the monograms!
So you could also say that obvious branding detracts the most for me–I simply saw only monogrammed bags in my instance. Companies who straight-up work hard to create a good product because of quality and yes, even because of a great look, are fine. But the LV pattern, for instance, it just reminds me of people wearing the same shirt from Express but in different colors. Or constructing shirts, dresses and pants all of the same fabric–and on top of that charging that pretty penny (admittedly–the monogrammed patterns seem to be the beginning line as acronyms indicate: D&G vs. Dolce…, etc.).
And yes–the Oakley sunglasses? I would drop more bills on that because they were higher quality, not because of the brand, either. I’d think a Ferragamo pair, for instance, would get a higher “brand” ranking. But the Oakleys are created more for active purposes and I would buy them for durability reasons.
I agree on fake bags–I would rather not and do not own one, either. I admit I got a little caught up in how much I do not see the “value” in buying a real one.
I don’t like wearing in-yo-face brands like izod and polo. No thanks. Only Gucci for me.
Tsk Tsk Tsk. Made in China = no good. Made in Taiwan = woooop!
I don’t understand the monogramming… I find it crass. I’ve seen the LV bags, and the leather work, stitching and other qualities regarding craftsmanship are all very well done, but ugh, the monogramming! I generally don’t like any too obvious brand names on my clothing… if it’s something functional rather than a fashion statement (like my cameras), I don’t mind it.
That being said, my girlfriend loves LV. Different strokes for different folks!