[lbo-talk] Making beautiful stuff

jthorn65 at sbcglobal.net jthorn65 at sbcglobal.net
Wed May 18 12:36:43 PDT 2005



> At 10:03 AM 5/18/2005, Doug Henwood wrote:
> >Cseniornyc at aol.com wrote:
> >
> >>but since you are in Soho, go the corner of Broadway and Prince to the
> >>Prada Store
> >
> >I've been there. Also very very beautiful store and merch. Of course the
> >pricetags are ridiculous, but I don't get why so many people can focus on
> >that and not the sensual pleasures. This is a new take on the old maxim
> >about knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing!

But I am not doing what you accuse me of. If I mention the price you seem to read only that and assume that I am focusing exclusively or predominently on that aspect when that is not the case. I asked if there is a social cost incurred when a $550 Gucci Biarossa shoe is sold and coveted when it looks for all the world like a $10 pair of canvas Keds. I believe there is. This is not akin to "knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing." I never said anything about the beauty or uglyness of the product. It is just a canvas deck shoe, neither beautiful nor ugly. I did not accidentially pick the Bianco and Biarossa vs. Keds shoes as example rather than a Wm. Dubin sculpture vs. an erector set. I never said someone should not spend $3500 on a leather sofa when they can buy an inexpensive cloth covered one at Target for $400. I never said anyone should not buy fashionable clothes. I did not say no one should pay a premium for consumption goods that are more stylish, to their tastes, than other less expensive items. I ask if there is a social cost to having nearly identical items, one of which sells for 50 or more times the other, and it exists as a class signifier rather than a commodity. I did not disparage all premium priced, stylish, or well crafted items nor should one infer by my example that this was my intention.

I have a friend who is a metal sculptor. He recently sold a piece for $30,000. I know some progressives who said "Whoa, that's the problem with consumerism man! People paying $30,000 for a hunk of metal." (They really speak this way) One problem, but certainly not the only one, with that statement is that while he did receive $30,000 for the sculpture but he spent $7000 for materials, has put a lot of wear and tear on his equipment and spent 4 months making the sculpture. Not to mention that he is incredibly skilled at his craft and that took many years of hard work. He makes a bit less than $60,000 a year. He does what he loves and is lucky to make a living at it but he also busts his ass working 50 to 60 hours a week. It is frequently hot, dirty, and dangerous work. Casting metal is not a genteel past time.

Your mischaracterization of my position would suggest that I would have a problem with this when I don't. If he cast drawer pulls that were just like the ones at Lowes that sell for $4.50 each but sold them for $75 each because his name was coveted, not his quality superior, I would have a problem with that however. You seem to assign some sort of sensual value merely to the act of spending large sums of cash for consumer goods that are, for all intents and purposes, identical to other well made and/or stylish goods that sell for 1/50th their price.

John Thornton



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list