 |
    |
No really- like flour, yeast, oil… Yeah.
New online mag “Flamboyant” has included various pictures of branded and otherwise odd baked goods in their “Daily Bread” section of their first issue.
We’ve seen this kind of Appropriation before- in candy, cakes, guns, antlers and remember the LV electric chair and LV monogram live PIGS?
Uh… yeah. The black leather bandaids, I could see. For those injured goth or rocker types.
Luxist wrote on the leather version, and I thought… “hmmm, interesting concept- and looks like they’re getting some press.” I mean, at our house, we’ve got “Camp Rock” bandaids, and Hello Kitty bandaids and Camo bandaids- but nobody’s doing cool bandaids for folks over 11. What about white patent? Or Leopard? I think people might buy those… But the whole unauthorized Louis Vuitton monogram version was a turn-off.
What do you think?
Do I need to say more?
Here are all the details, I can’t even put pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard) on this one…
I know I’m beating this dead horse- (and I hate that phrase- the poor horse!)– but really. “Fusion art”? Come on now.
In case you’ve forgotten the formula (and how could you since literally EVERYONE is doing it…)
1. Take one unexpected item- Gun, Bullet, Electric Chair, Statue of African Baby, Lollipop, piece of Classic Art
2. Add internationally recognizable luxury brand signature monogram- LV, CC, GG, FF, YSL, Dior
3. Find an Art Gallery- and open your exhibit!
Seriously, though. Who isn’t doing this? I guess luxury brands spend millions and millions of dollars promoting their brand’s marks- so folks are going to do what they can to make a little money on it.
I love that I want to say “why would we care”… but obviously I’m blogging it… 
Pic Credit: Hypebeast
It’s getting boring blogging about “artists” who go the lazy route, and use designer logos and trademarks in their work.
I didn’t even blog about the “Fashion Weapons” by still life photographer Massimo Gammacurta, because I’d blogged about so many other artists who’ve done exactly… the… same… thing. You know, take something violent and offensive like an electric chair or a bullet or a creepy looking dog… and wrap it all up in Louis Vuitton monogram, or quilted Chanel, or signature Dior or whatever. It’s gotten so old.
But looks like the tactic worked for Massimo, cause now he’s doing logos in candy. Like I’ve always said, appropriation: it’s art for the lazy.
What do you think? Scream & MLK are digging the iconic Louis Vuitton monogram? This is the cover of their new mixtape.
It’s hard to say what Louis Vuitton will think about this. They didn’t like Rubin Studdard’s, but they didn’t mind Kanye’s Louis Vuitton Don cover, so who knows.
Just wondering if this (Marc Jacob’s Louis Vuitton monogram canvas “Fantasy Dog” bag pictured above on a Damier Sauvage rug) inspired this frightening little bit of LV appropriation art from Meryl Smith:
… that I blogged about a while back…
What do you think?
Marc’s Louis Vuitton Fantasy Dog pic credit: Marina Faust
What is it with “artists” using the Louis Vuitton monogram in weapons and ammunition?
Apparently, this was part of the communications campaign kit by design firm 21:19 for Bita Haidarian’s autobiographical film, “Finding Bibi”. I’m just done with the whole, use the iconic Louis Vuitton logo on a bullet or gun to make a political statement. It’s been done OVER and OVER.
Uh… yeah. So bizarre. Not the concept of using the Louis Vuitton trademark logos on automatic weapons- that’s been done to death. What’s bizarre to me, is how similar the “new” Justin Melnick “ARM ME” exhibition is in comparison with Peter Gronquiest’s The Revolution will be Fabulous- A Weapons of Mass Designer Show in LA just a couple months ago. I mean, is it possible that Justin’s “images” are pictures of Peter’s work? Take a look:
From Justin’s exhibition:
From Peter’s:
The fact is that the whole thing bugs me on several levels.
First, it’s just not clever. Sure, it’s disguised as clever, but it’s just not. It’s the oldest, easiest trick in the book. Use Louis Vuitton (and other luxury label’s good names) obviously without their permission and on something ugly and controversial. Quick money.
Such a direct copy of an already lousy concept just demonstrates a lack of imagination. It’s just not impressive at all- and again- actually is only remotely interesting considering the irony and the real battles that Louis Vuitton et. al wage with people copying them everyday.
Don’t get me wrong- I think Peter’s work is just as bad. He’s clearly using illegally manufactured counterfeit scarves and unlicensed fabrics (you can see in closeups that these pieces aren’t painted- but use glued on fabric) to produce these “pieces of art” (and I use that phrase loosely). All this does is perpetuate the very problem that both exhibitions are meant to make statements on. Read articles on the connection between counterfeits and terrorism HERE and HERE.
Just my opinion. And I can tell from all over the web, that there are a lot of folks out there impressed and entertained by Justin & Peter’s work.
I mean… when will people learn. Louis Vuitton REALLY doesn’t like it when people use their marks without their permission.
So there’s this kind of clever game out there called Fakes for Real. It includes 60 cards and is a “Memory” style game where you match up pairs. But, instead of being matched sets of two- there is a real card matched with its fake. So… the real Mona Lisa and a repro, Bavaria’s Neuschwanstein castle and Sleeping Beauty’s Disneyland castle, the Villa Rotonda and its look-a-like “the White House”, an aerial picture of downtown Toronto and one from the computer game The Sims. I actually really like the concept!
However, the box and packaging are clearly inspired by the Louis Vuitton trademark logo pointed quatrefoils as well as the overall multicolore dress.
It’s temporarily offline- and here’s what the www.fakeforreal.com website looks like right now:
Ha! I totally LOVE what they did to most of the offending marks game in that pic:
Anyway… I mean, I get it. A game of fakes and they’re using the logos of the most historically faked brand satirically. But that’s just the problem. Louis Vuitton doesn’t want to be associated with anything counterfeit… let alone a game of fakes. (And quite frankly, they are vigilant in quashing the unauthorized use of their marks at all. Remember Britney, Ruben Studdard, Da Brat, BMG and the infamous Darfur shirt?)
Here’s an interesting read about it.
|
© 2010 FASHIONPHILE |
Bad Behavior has blocked 3425 access attempts in the last 7 days.
