Louis Vuitton Ladies: To Monogram or Not to Monogram
posted by: freePOrnaoa in General on February 22nd, 2011
I’ve always found that the LV lady is a certain kind of lady. She’s sophisticated, wealthy and might even travel with trunks! She’s not flash and cash new money. She’s usually a bit more traditional or mainstream, and not as into the cutting-edge shoes. Nothing wrong with that, as I like almost all shoes that aren’t monogrammed (they DO have monogrammed ones, both in the Damier style and the Monogram style). The LV shoes are pretty classic, and I like what they have going on.
I’d never carry an LV mag that was monogrammed. I just feel like they’re too easy to recognize. It’s like buying yourself into a cult.
That’s why I like the Sardegna, pictured below. The monogram is there, but it’s so subtle you hardly notice it. I’d actually like it better with no monogram at all, but for the design, I’ll take it.
Sardegna Wedge Pump in Monogram Vernis, $785 at LouisVuitton.com (click on E-Shop, Women, Shoes, Summer 2011)
What are your thoughts on monograms? Do you try to hide your brand names like a boho hipster, or are you out there in the open, a flaunting diva queen?
4 Comments
- Click Here to Speak Up
March 20, 2011 at 10:24 am, AnonymousBB said:
I still think of these and too flashy! The logo doesnt look that subtle:(
March 16, 2011 at 4:35 pm, diamondmarine said:
ewww do not like!
February 23, 2011 at 2:53 pm, galligator said:
I like diamond designs on fabric. So, while I always love the abstract you see on tapestry & period-type replica costumes, one of the only places I see this same type of basic diamond design on shoes is in logo prints. So, while I don't think I do own anything like that, I do like the classic brown/tan design that is the basis of a lot of the canvas-style logos. It's an aesthetic that appeals to me – but I'd be just as happy if I could get the same type of effect without the logo, if that makes sense.
By the same token, I'm not a big fan of medallion details on my shoes, so where I don't mind or may even like the appearance of some logo's printed on a fabric, I am put off by the medallion shoe logos (like T Burch) it's just not my aesthetic. I take them case by case, I suppose.
As for these shoes, the texture looks subtle enough that most people seeing them wouldn't even realize is was actually logo'd unless they were really staring at your feet. So, if you like it, go for it. I know some people assume that anybody wearing a logo is only there to shout out the brand. While that is true in enough cases, it is also true that there are gals who genuinely like that graphic-print aesthetic regardless of the parent brand being discussed. So, I suppose, it becomes what are you comfortable wearing. Thank goodness we all have different tastes & styles, at least that keeps fashion from becoming too boring.
February 23, 2011 at 2:00 pm, Bronwyn said:
I'm always amazed at people who will pay extra for the privilege of wearing advertising on their bodies. Just because it's for something extremely expensive doesn't stop it being advertising. I'd wear a monogram if, and only if, it was attractive in its own right. For instance, the guy in my town who makes leather bags and wallets has an attractive logo he puts by the clasp of his bags, but no one outside my town has ever heard of him. I'd prefer the bag without it but it's attractive enough, and they don't come without, so I wear it. Logos and monograms as an all over design? Yech.