Picking away at labels

At the Connecticut private school where I spent some time 20 years ago, Brooks Brothers Oxford shirts were about as key for social acceptance as No. 2 pencils were for the SATs.

Cotton, for that rumpled look.

Were they straighter-stitched or more durable than, say, Arrow shirts, which came in the same lovely pastels? Nobody cared.

It was a label thing.

Today, "Abercrombie" is more than just shorthand for the clothier Abercrombie & Fitch. It's practically a caste in some suburban schools. Urban kids tend to favor FUBU ("for us, by us").

Youths may be the most malleable inhabitants of our brand-label nation. But many adults get pulled in too - at least some of the time. We know who we are.

Of course, brand loyalty can be justified. Some companies hand-build their reputations for quality. (These can hold up even long after new owners or cost-cutting has hollowed out a founder's vision.)

Brand warfare can be fun. At the end of tours at their Vermont facility, Ben & Jerry's employees have been known to jest that the ice cream they reject gets shipped over to Hagen-Dazs - a Euro-sounding product that hails from plain-spoken Minneapolis.

But label confusion can have shady overtones. Major garment manufacturers were recently scolded for stitching technically correct "Made in USA" tags on clothes sewn cheaply in Saipan, a US commonwealth in the Pacific.

More often, in the life of the average mallgoer, labels are trivial. (Let's see: Old Navy is basically a cheaper version of The Gap, itself a cheaper version of The Limited.)

But that trivia hits your wallet.

And that explains the need for the kind of label-consciousness our lead story explores.

* Reach us at work@csps.com

(c) Copyright 2000. The Christian Science Publishing Society

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
QR Code to Picking away at labels
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today