In a purely linguistic sense, we can not identify “Luxury” and “Fashion” as something unique, as they are words that define “sometimes” antagonistic concepts. It would not be correct to identify luxury in the 70s with the HIPPY movement. Being that this movement was directly linked to fashion, it maintained a strong rejection of the world of luxury (at least ideologically).
Therefore, and said the above, it must be understood that luxury and fashion allied themselves through patterns defined by social classes of high purchasing power visit https://www.midwestjewellery.com/ to get more information. Substantially I always like to clarify that luxury and fashion are not always linked to good taste; In fact, I think we have lived through years of opulence full of bad taste, mainly due to what I define as “easy money”.
If we start from the above we can see that my approach to the world “fashion-luxury” is linked to classical concepts, so I look largely discreet against the ostentatious. Luxury is based on different edges composed of different facets. Personally, I conceive luxury as something intimate, something that gives me inner wealth and satisfaction for me and those around me. But it is evident in turn that there is an external luxury, that which is seen from a more social perspective. Here comes, in my view, the concept of fashion and luxury as a social phenomenon.
Every human being needs to identify with someone and/or something; This fact makes us have a sense of belonging to a certain social group (sociologically called “tribe”). It is here where the concept of FASHION is born because each group is externally identified by its way of dressing, its way of being, of seeing life and a wide etcetera of things that mark each one’s life. Where we are born and with whom we grow, they mark our social part to a great extent.
If we understand fashion as a passenger, I’m not interested. To enter that game we would be in a consumer world without remission. For the fad, you always have to have a bucket nearby, because you have to buy and once it’s out of style, throw it away. That is why I focus more on the world of the classic; that world that a priori does not go out of fashion. This feeling is easier for me to explain if I talk about diamonds. A diamond is something eternal and elegant faceted. When we carve them we always seek to take full advantage of all the facets in order to give the greatest possible brightness. Diamonds do not go out of style, they are eternal as is their own existence. With a diamond, I can make a design that lasts over time, something that almost has a life of its own and its life is eternal. But if I want my designs not to die, I must focus on what I believe and not on what I do not believe. Everything that is done with good taste, without extravagances, without looking for excessive shine and without the desire to look for the most expensive, tends to be discreet and therefore lasting over time.
When I talk about my creations and someone does not understand what I mean, I talk about my shoes (it’s my hobby). I need them to be soft, to tame them in a short time and to stay like a glove. But it is also, and once the shoe is made to me, I need them to last, because I enjoy them when I forget to wear them. The same thing I think should happen with fashion in general and diamonds in particular. Dressing up and not needing to be aware of the clothes we wear is for me to be elegant. Wearing a diamond with discretion and forgetting about it is having understood elegance.