Karl Lagerfeld on wine

J

Jonathan Loesberg

Jonathan Loesberg
In the RVF, which someone in CdP gave me because of their listing of the 50 top CdP's, there is an interview with Karl Lagerfeld (of whom I had previously never heard) on how to improve the wine market (more or less). It has to be read to be believed. Lagarfeld seemed to be doing a very impressive Andy Warhol imitation, which the RVF took seriously.

I don't know how to get a link to this article. It's in the Nov. issue. But if someone can, please post it as providing one of the funniest bits of absurdism I've read recently.
 
originally posted by Jonathan Loesberg: one of the funniest bits of absurdism I've read recently.
Click to expand...

Sounds like Lagerfeld!

A friend of mine has spent some summers with Karl on his island and indeed the man does not drink. But he serves incredibly good wine. And he is very absurd.
 
Top CdPs? Is Foillard 3.14 on top? [Just kidding]

And Karl Lagerfeld is now dispensing advice on wine marketing? Is he planning on open a little wine boutique in H&Ms or something?
 
The chi-chi stuff that Jeff found is the least silly thing in the interview. Here's an answer to the question, "What memories do you have of good times with regard to wine?" (this asked after he has already said that he no longer drinks wine:

You have to be careful about what you call the conviviality of wine because this guild aspect, this familiarity makes wine commonplace, gives it an ordinariness. If you want wine to become a luxury item, you cannot base it on an image of conviviality between nice friends. That does an injustice to it! You have to learn to consider wine as an egoistic pleasure. Tasting a wine is like choosing a perfume. You need, almost, to "narcissize" wine.

Andy Warhol has better quotes about art, but this is certainly in his vein.
 
Having not read the whole piece, just the quote above, I'm not sure what is absurd about it. The thought actually strikes me, as usual with Karl L., as a quite astute realization. In this case, it is about the wine market as regards wine as luxury good.

Do I want wine to be a luxury good? No, I personally want it to be just the opposite. I abhor the idea of wine marketed as a luxury, actually. But that does not dimish the intelligence of what was said.

I regularly think of things Mr. Lagerfeld has said. He is one of the more interesting people to listen to in interview of which I am aware.

I happen to like, "Brown is not the new black. Brown will never be the new black. Black will always be the new black." And also: "if you lose 150 million dollars, you are still rich."

I'm actually fascinated by the guy. A Chanel show at the Grand Palais a couple seasons back was one of the most amazing and stunning scripted events I have ever seen. It is available on YouTube, btw.

One of the things I have noticed about Lagerfeld is that when someone asks him a question, he answers it. People aren't used to that, I think. The no BS style of it, I mean. He addresses and sums up situations in a deeply sophisticated and worldy manner. The mind behind the comments is pretty amazing.
 
Well, part of the point of the article is how to solve the current crisis in wine sales. The RVF somewhat positions the interview this way. Lagerfeld's method can no doubt sell Dom Perignon (his ad for it I think incited the article), but not much else.

The statement, like Andy Warhol's about art, accurately captures how a certain aspect of the market thinks about wine in wonderfully crass language, then makes that way of thinking an aesthetic claim. Like Warhol, if Largerfeld believes what he is saying straightforwardly, he is a dope. But I agree he may be a genius of self-marketing with an instinctive sense of satire.
 
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
originally posted by Levi Dalton:
Having not read the whole piece, just the quote above, I'm not sure what is absurd about it.
Click to expand...
He was asked about his memories. He gave marketing advice instead.
Click to expand...

Well, there is that. But since he doesn't drink wine, or, to judge from other answers, particularly care for it, he couldn't really have memories tied to it--unless they were bad ones that made him stop drinking, I guess. So you can't blame for not answering the question. I really meant that what he was suggesting was treating wine as if it were an object to be appreciated for its rarity and for the pleasure in possessing the rarity. The direct attack on appreciating wine because it's a pleasurable part of dining with friends is like saying one shouldn't appreciate something for the pleasure it gives because that would make it too ordinary--pleasures being so, well, ordinary.

It's not that he gave marketing advice. It's that the marketing advice is terrible. Only as a comment on how wine is appreciated to the remarks make sense. That is what I meant by the absurdism and the satire.

By the way, he seems to choose to look like the villain in a movie made from a comic strip. That is a style choice, no doubt, and one that fits with his self-presentation in the interview. In his case, though, black is the old black.
 
Well, the Claudia Schiffer breast glass (designed by/for Lagerfeld) was impressive if unwieldy.
 
I think the aristocratic mindset is being lost in translation here (cross-reference Marie Antoinette breast glass).

The man doesn't share democratic values. It seems like snob airs from the outside, feels like a club from the inside. That probably works pretty well in the fashion and luxury worlds (often the same world).

In fact, he seems to have found the perfect niche for himself. No easy task in a free world. That is what I mean when I say Lagerfeld does not BS around. He is completely frank about who he is, where he is coming from, and he doesn't make apologies for luxury or try to pretend that it is an inclusive space.

Often people either seem either embarassed, uneasy, or overawed by wealth. I think that the attraction of Lagerfeld is that he in no way seems to have a false conciousness about it. He is at home in a world of corporate sponsored wealth. Wealthy people who are unsure of themselves most likely appreciate the sense of calm.

Plato also didn't share democratic values. It is possible to be an elitist and also posses an astute mind.

Do I share the same outlook on world affairs as Lagerfeld? No, I don't. Do I possess anything he has signed his name to? No, I don't.

But I imagine that I appreciate Versailles as much as he does, although probably for different reasons.
 
originally posted by Levi Dalton:
I think the aristocratic mindset is being lost in translation here (cross-reference Marie Antoinette breast glass).

The man doesn't share democratic values. It seems like snob airs from the outside, feels like a club from the inside. That probably works pretty well in the fashion and luxury worlds (often the same world).

In fact, he seems to have found the perfect niche for himself. No easy task in a free world. That is what I mean when I say Lagerfeld does not BS around. He is completely frank about who he is, where he is coming from, and he doesn't make apologies for luxury or try to pretend that it is an inclusive space.

Often people either seem either embarassed, uneasy, or overawed by wealth. I think that the attraction of Lagerfeld is that he in no way seems to have a false conciousness about it. He is at home in a world of corporate sponsored wealth. Wealthy people who are unsure of themselves most likely appreciate the sense of calm.

Plato also didn't share democratic values. It is possible to be an elitist and also posses an astute mind.

Do I share the same outlook on world affairs as Lagerfeld? No, I don't. Do I possess anything he has signed his name to? No, I don't.

But I imagine that I appreciate Versailles as much as he does, although probably for different reasons.
Click to expand...

Plato was anti-democratic and intelligent. As I said, if he is doing an Andy Warhol, Lagerfeld is both as well, though in a different manner. Taking what he says and how he looks straight as a higher fashion sense (at least in this interview), assuming he means it straight, doesn't show either elitism (for which one actually has to be elite, I would have thought)or fashion sense, to my mind. I don't think one can read my posts in any way as criticizing him for being too elite. His ideas about wine aren't anti-democratic, their absurd (a significant difference).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top