Chanel 1987

Posted on: April 9, 2008

Coffee or champagne

Yesterday I burst out laughing. I simply couldn’t help and even if, yes, I thought I should get angry, there was simply no backing in my soul for such a reaction: on the contrary, waves of laughter came up once and again out of the depth of my unconscious invading my awareness while I was desperately trying to gather some concepts around a possible hostile positioning.

It all started early in the morning. I woke up with the intuition something had happened and before I verified anything I wrote a polite e-mail to Roger Vivier I found somewhere around in some site (as theirs is under construction) to possibly verify whether there was really an Inés de la Fressange in the communication department and using as blunt excuse the question whether it was possible to make the difference between real and counterfeit perfumes.

It’s true that the whole story about Roger Vivier had struck my mind a few days ago, and some little questions had staid in the back of my memory. It’s a fact that I had heard the name Roger Vivier, but am not absolutely sure about his doings and makings nor even if he has died or is still living. A quick search in wikipedia informs me of the fact that he has been selling high quality shoes starting somewhere around the 30ies.The thing that strikes me is the following: products ‘Roger Vivier’ are already offered in , shoes and jewelry, under … prêt á porter. Or shoes and jewelry are no prêt a porter at all, but … accessories. Their site is strangely still under construction although already showing … 4 shops world wide.

As I really don’t want to get into more trouble than I actually am in, and it seems that each research of mine is a new bomb revealing deep insufficiencies in system, I simply leave things there.

Yesterday though some kind of obscure and dark and black intuition obliges me to reopen investigations. Inés de la Fressange declares in February 2007 that Roger Vivier is going to open a shop again soon and that she’s going to take over the communication department. (Information taken from different sites in French, English and Spanish, I’d kindly request of who interested to just take a walk around in order not to have to copy paste everything on the blog and perhaps feel the same hilarity invade his/her mind.) In some sites she appears as managing the whole as general manager (’sous la houlette de …’) which is given back in English speaking countries as such, while Spaniards limit her active power to communication.

Somewhere, Roger Vivier is linked to some one called Diego dela Valle, owner of the so called group ‘Tods’, who sells caoutchouc shoes world wide with greatest success. The ‘group’ Tods is nothing but a fusion of two different companies by Diego dela Valle, who, is said, has acquired the name and creations of Roger Vivier, who died in 1998, although he hadn’t been running his shop for 30 years anymore. It is said that dela Valle acquires the rights from the inheritors in 1999 and decides to start a ‘Roger Vivier’ line or company in 2006 together with Inés de la Fressange and shoe designer Friona, who is responsible of adapting the original designs into a contemporary context.

It’s true that the result is not bad.

The laughter starts when making researches on dela Valle I fall not only on a quite poisoned article in wikipedia, where in three lines, in a spirit that reminds me of some bitter Italian aristocracy pushing someone to his right place, he’s treated as ‘basse classe’. The latter seems to find some support in an Edith Piaf to Coco Chanel reminding story of someone who arrives very poorly to New York and start a shoe business, until son Diego has the brilliant idea of commercializing caoutchouc shoes and becomes a tycoon, business man or related without ever looking specifically as a shoe designer.

Articles in French do make appear ‘Tod’s’ as almost luxury product sold to the Spanish Monarchy and other celebrities, and although it’s true that I don’t know whether it’s true, I can’t hardly imagine the King of Spain wearing caoutchouc shoes, if presented as such. In any case, the impression left by the whole is a somehow brilliant, emotive, dizzy, confused and almost hilarious whole, where it is easy to imagine my Natasha landing with a helicopter in Les Halles or my Russian Prince making obscure investigations through internet while people continue hunting foxes around Buckingham Palace eating Bendick’s chocolates.

This almost fairy tale ambiance is underlined by the fact that it is said that you are received in the high luxury shop in Paris with the question: “Coffee or Champagne?” which is the reason of a definite bursting out of laughter, while I see in my imagination some art deco characters of the 30ies serving drinks with heavy underlying insinuations meaning either you belong to our complot (coffee) or not (champagne), in which latter case you’ll be frozenly served with all politeness aiming at your pockets and not at your friendship.
It’s true, I can’t help thinking, that’s Inés de la Fressange driving her revenge to the borders of mysticism and in complete unawareness, developing some kind of horribly of mine inspired strategy that is though completely out of context. What shocks me though is that becoming quickly aware of the consequences, I can’t help laughing and laughing and praying some one may be more serious than me, I finally manage to fall asleep.
What appears to my eyes is the following: somehow blind of fury (which I do understand) Fressange sees in LVMH the enemy with capital letters. Fressange is very strong, influent and knows tons of people. On top of that she’s horribly seducing. Links to the House of Monaco through Carolina and Stéphanie are heavy supports in whatever new inspiration crosses her angry soul. I imagine her in some kind of literary salon or other meeting point where rich people or wants to be spend their time around a drink trying to forget their boredom, where a millionaire without social perspective like dela Valle gets horribly seduced by such distinguished manners and doesn’t see any other way of making up a project for the future than to get up a rank by introducing himself into aristocratic circles (she said, I suppose.) While he is thus sending roses and copying poems from some internet site, she pushes him into business, hiding herself behind what seems to her a strong man, who she won’t mind drawing as ‘leading man of a group facing French LVMH’, while in evidence two fused companies don’t really face an almost 60 companies regrouping LVMH, if well considered. In the mean time (around November 2006) she eats up an ocean of pride in order to show herself in some meeting with Lagerfeld, as if presuming that her German/Italian alliance will finish by breaking LVMH.
If my understanding is correct, it is though not fundamentally LVMH who has attacked her, but Dior in LVMH in probable alliance with Lagerfeld. She’s thus, to my understanding, surrounded by the wolves that are at the origin of her fall. If I were LVMH I would in evidence use Lagerfeld (in debt) in order to attack dela Valle, by simply pointing at the lack of knowledge in a different environment. Once dela Valle is knocked out, I get rid of Lagerfeld who is already causing image problem everywhere by alleging some pretext. Even if I’m not LVMH, I know that strategies, that are more or less unconscious and do provoke the reaction of a whole without further agreements, are put into functioning almost automatically. Logically Fressange is again pushed against the wall, with Champagne or without.
My own strategy, which is in fact nothing but a theoretical solution to a general problem tending at diminishing tension arisen from some dysfunction (in order, yes, Madame de la Fressange, try avoiding that kind of hidden revolutionary movements), does isolate disturbing factors at the origin of the dysfunction through a personal attack that should not involve the main group, whose main interests are thus preserved. In my new strategy, the name Fressange is thus restored through a behind the back strategy that causes the fall of Lagerfeld or who ever, and allows even thinking a closer interaction between LVMH and Fressange in some kind ‘independent pole to general frame’ interaction.
What seems to be a support of Fressange is in fact a subtle balance between different interests and powers, which takes into consideration international situations in a double frame (a leading to no where actual state, and a possibility which is opened in some kind of hypothetical merge.)
Probably accidentally it looks as if Fressange got in knowledge of one or the other of my strategies (image through internet) and builds up in quickness a support of her own campaign in her own structure of understanding: while I tend putting women in front that are veiled through the cold male structures underlying, she tends putting men in front she wraps into a mystical female aura. In this context, my Fressange is in fact nothing but a heavy support of LVMH, while dela Valle becomes the slave of a blind desire of revenge with a glamorous touch. Unluckily, the strategy is horribly good: revenge finds more popular ground than my balanced wisdoms and it is obvious that whatever she may do in that direction will necessarily be of greatest success.
Two days ago, in my chess game, I say myself defeated. I don’t even make the effort of translating all her inspirations into possible legal claims: the popular support is already warranted and has reached even higher ranks thanks to my own indirect support. An attack on Fressange at this point could be the cause of a popular revolt. Not attacking her though, the reason of civil war, as main financial references disappear in an undetermined ground without law or proper legislation being at the origin of a possible breaking down of heavy poles of financial interaction and thus leading to inner war. Intuition versus understanding?
When yesterday I see female dela Valle joining my male Fressange on internet waves I can’t but bursting out laughing. And now?
Two strategies have run one into the other, while the opponent is using the first’s strategy, taking it for hers.
I have to chose a field, and I can’t but chose LVMH. To buy Fressange now with some distances assures the possibility of integration of a new strategy into a normal market and channels at the same time great lots of unconscious desires while keeping them inside of a reasonable frame. To leave Fressange in her anarchic rage will only be the cause of the fall of LVMH as former strategies have run into a void. The negligence of such strategy will open the appetite of those who will thus have discovered Siegfried’s wound in luxury product marketing and managing. It’s an evidence that the Obelix and Asterix strategy breaks all lines of established business, and the only way to avoid a general cracking of the markets is to take it for oneself as this allows to effectively counter attack those who may start wanting invading markets copying such graceful inspiration.
The only consequent solution to my understanding is to integrate Fressange with her hooligans into a larger business frame, even if this destroys German economy. At the end what do you care about German economy if you’re struggling for survival yourself and may find that way a more universal bridging system than the one existing before.
Perhaps I’d have to count with Fressange’s vanity at the end that would prefer a restoration of name to a blood bath. But I’ll have to talk to her cousin first.
From “Ines de la Fressange and the Russian Prince” page 307



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Semble intéressant

Blog Stats

  • 43,926 hits
%d bloggers like this: