Louis Vuitton

700x503_DP_Vuitton_KR

I saw this ad on the back of a broadsheet newspaper several years ago, a Sunday paper I think. It was huge- the entire back page in fact. I couldn’t do much but stare at it for a few minutes, mouth agape. It’s Keith Richards from The Rolling Stones, in an ad for Louis Vuitton. ‘Some journeys cannot be put into words’ the tagline reads. You’d laugh to hear that said out loud, but in the context of the ad it’s convincing on some level. They’re flashing such intimidating credentials you’re in no position to argue. The ad is transparently an effort to lord it up over the viewer, and not much besides. Pretty joyless affair. Ok ok, Louis Vuitton, you win, I surrender. Pricks.

Advertisements

30 thoughts on “Louis Vuitton

  1. Someone got a lot of money for that corny tagline. I wonder if Keith needed the money. Madonna ruined L/V for me so I don’t think they can shock me more than they already have.

    • I sorta getting that you don’t have a problem with these kind of ads in general? I think actually ‘journey’ in that ad might have kicked off ‘journey’ being used all the time in pompous advertising. Because that was back in 2008.

      • The tagline is weak, so I don’t disagree with you there. The ads are corny because most artistic teams are headed by people who imagine they make sense. They will spew garbage and expect a standing ovation. People who work with them need to be tranquilised to deal with the constant irritation. These ads are irritating because people who give final approval get paid enormous amounts and people follow them around. I cringe at some of the ads but I avoid TV and don’t consume that many magazines so I can usually avoid the irritation. x

      • No, Treat. They don’t have sense, just well connected and talented at feeding the right beasts. These huge design houses thrive on the skills of freelance artists, underpaid labourers and most of their earnings go to marketing. People don’t buy the tagline, they buy the image, or else someone with sense would write their copy. Remember Brad Pitt for Chanel No. 5? Embarrassing. x

      • Yeah I could see the tagline was not the bit doing the work. ‘It’s not a journey’ is how Brad Pitt begins his gibberish in that ad! Blew my mind after all the talk of journeys I’d been hearing.

      • It is an interesting problem. I have dysphonia and that stuff would bug me enough to warrant a major rant. Your media analysis skills are finely tuned. I appreciate that very much. The copywriters, on the other hand, are not okay. Have a great Tuesday. x

    • Hello… you know I just realised I didn’t comprehend that the tagline was in reference to him being a musician and expressing himself through music and fashion, rather than words. I just thought it was saying that his experience of life has been so profound that we’re all rendered speechless, stupefied, in the face of it. I mean- there is that aspect to it, but I didn’t pick up on the double meaning. Did you notice that I hadn’t? Is that fucking face-palm stuff?

      • Thank you for responding. I thought your post was really interesting. I hadn’t thought in terms of “correct” or “incorrect”. I that all interpretations were open to discussion and you seemed to have a great sense of humour, which is why I took the liberty of joining in. I hope you’re having a great Saturday.

  2. You are wrong on two points without question. Well three without question actually.

    1. The tag line statement is a truth. If you had a thought beyond the pompous posturing you’d get it.

    2. Of course you’re in position to argue. Mind you it takes someone with a brain and a spine to do it.

    3. There is one Treat Williams and you aint him. Now if you called yourself the Cowardly Scarecrow, I could believe it!

    Now I have 4th point. Originality and you are strangers to each other.

    • 1. Um, no, it’s a dumbass tagline.
      2. I was being kinda rhetorical. The point was you absolutely would argue.
      3. Fair enough.
      Mate I was prepared to be quaking in my boots at your onslaught but it’s just not cutting.

  3. Must be how I look at photographs because I’m more interested in noticing that Keith Richards is drinking tea and reading a paperback. It rings more true than the scarf draped over the lampshade and the skull beside it.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s