Idea: Powerpoint/Keynote presentations at Thanksgiving dinner.
I never really got the handbag obsession that seems to have American females firmly in its claws, but I understand it now - though I find it more funny than frustrating now. Handbags are almost always plastered with these logos and lettering that tells you where its from and from which you can gather its approximate cost. From this, you are supposed to have in your head an idea of the social status of the person, I guess.
The handbag is one of the few publicly acceptable methods of projecting status for women. Men can wear shirts with that have a little polo playing guy or Nordstrom sailboat on the chest, or a recognizably Hermes tie. Women can't really wear something that can effectively tell people how much you spent on it, except for handbags (and, to a lesser extent, shoes).
The funny part is that the things that are most recognizable to everyone as being from somewhere, cost the least. The more expensive things have less logos or understandable characteristics. For someone on the elevator to appreciate or understand the object, they must be a part of the consumer country club that has bothered to invest the time/money in understand/appreciate the object. In that way, it is like a secret handshake.
Examples of my point:
-Dooney & Bourke handbags at Nordstrom. The logos begin to disappear as you climb the price ladder. It is the entry level goods that have the loudest logos.
-Similar pricing for Louis Vuitton handbags
-It holds fairly generally for Dior handbags (look at the "saddle bag" things - the $990 and $1390 ones only use the "D" for the zipper thing, I guess).
You can buy the "Louis Vuitton" bag that is uber-gauche with lots of interlocking LVs or the "really really very Louis Vuitton" bag that has none at all. Handbags are like Simpsons quotes for girls. "I bent my wookie" or "Me fail English? That's unpossible" is the $200 one that screams the brand - "frank and productive" is the $1,500 one.
