Misuse of [Name of Label] Name

The most interesting reading in the June 17 Women’s Wear Daily? The full-page ad on page 12. Entitled “A Request to Fashion Editors, Advertisers, Copywriters and Others Regarding Misuse of the CHANEL name,” the advertisement goes on to state that the term CHANEL should not be used to describe anything other than CHANEL.

“Although our style is justly famous,” the ad modestly declares, “a jacket is not ‘a CHANEL’ jacket unless it is ours.'” In other words, lay off the CHANEL moniker to describe other folks’ clothing. Sometimes a banana is NOT a banana, Anna.

The ad finishes up by stating that “our lawyers insist our trademark is fully respected,” so don’t use the term to describe anything else than the real deal–no Chanel-like, no Chanel-style, no Chanel-ified, and so forth. Trotting out the lawyers brings along the specters of law suits, should fashion editors, advertisers, copywriters, and others continue to misuse the name.

So, I guess we are not to compare anything to [Name of Label] anymore. If it’s not the real deal, ix-nay on the ANEL-CHay. Is this just the start of others standing up for the complete integrity of their labels? And–what would Coco do?

Can Fashion and Politics and Musicals Mix?

I was gobsmacked to read that a musical is barreling towards Broadway, and the subject matter is–Imelda Marcos?

My excitement grew when I read that David “This is Not My Beautiful House” Byrne and Fatboy Slim are the creative musical forces behind Here Lies Love, which was first conceived in 2010. Transformed to a musical last year at the Williamstown Theatre Festival, Here Lies Love will hit the New York Stage this spring, at the Public Theater.

This is not the first time a musical has been made about a fashionista–remember Katherine Hepburn starring as Coco Chanel in the late 1960’s? But I’m fascinated to find out what these two make of the former Philippine First Lady. And yes, I do hope there’s a song featuring those infamous 3,000+ pairs of shoes.