Standards are changing, and for the most part, I'm on board with that. For example:
- Forty is the new twenty. Ok, I can buy that.
- Fifty is the new thirty. Again, totally behind the concept of the chronological do-over.
- Green is the new black (although my LBD will never be replaced in my heart).
- Change is the new constant (unless you're a Republican, then it's SSDD).
But I must draw the line somewhere. And I've drawn it RIGHT HERE.
When I crack open a fresh magazine, do I want to see articles about "FabuLESS" and "How To Do MORE with LESS" or "Spend LESS, Look Great"? Nope, no way! This is NOT acceptable. One of the few things that helps elevate me above my plebeian state in life is the lusting, craving, motivating feeling that eats me alive when I get a glimpse of a $30k dress or an $18k handbag. Think I'll ever own one of those? Nope, no way! But must I be deprived of my ogling of these shameless delights within the safe havens of magazines just because eight years of Bush has so completely frigged up this nation that Rhodes scholars and HBS graduates can't figure out what the hell to do? Is this mess MY FAULT?!? Nope, no way!
I WANT MY OGLING BACK! I DO NOT WANT THE CONTINUAL LECTURE ABOUT HOW TO SURVIVE ON LESS: I ALREADY SURVIVE ON LESS! I WANT TO DREAM ABOUT MORE! GIVE ME BACK MY CONSUMERIST DREAMS, DAMMIT!
So I get an email from Loew's in Philly, entitled "Value is the New Luxury". OMG, are you kidding me? This MUST be a joke, right? Nope, no way.
1 comments:
For me doing with less simply means doing without those things that don't add value to my life. I no longer want things just to have things.
But when it comes to something I love and appreciate and actually use, there's no cutting back. In fact, once I got the clutter out of my life the remaining things provided more benefit to me than before.
Post a Comment