Distortion signifies???
What makes a Laborghini tasteful or not?
Vulgarity is an interesting concept because its perception undoes the power of perceived wealth. I think it is more interesting that it’s rarely used by poor and lower middle classes to describe the wealthy – but by the wealthy to describe other wealthy people who flaunt their wealth, because, presumably they must have once been poor themselves to want to impress their wealth upon an average society, and are therefore a false upper class. But what is acceptable and why should it matter? It seems that artists often openly rebel against upper class society to become openly embraced by it (or parts of it). The irony makes sense because poking fun at one’s self (high society) helps diffuse the threat of class differentiation – but doing so creates the need to embrace the antagonist (artist), and so – vulgarity becomes tasteful……..rebels seem to succeed without want while desirous imposters ultimately don’t stand a chance.
I agree, I drive a Lamborghini because it’s a high performance and ascetically pleasing supercar that increases in value after purchase. I fail to see how anyone could call it vulgar, what they really object to is the girl driving it.
Sorry Steph,
No offense to you, and thank you for pointing out the investment potential.
I used Lamborghini as an illustration because it is a quintessential status symbol and some say the supreme car…
But you have to admit that luxury brands are always going to have critics because they symbolize society’s inequalities.
But I think vulgarity is mostly contextual – Gold is gold right? The black man on the Chicago streets, wearing 20 separate gold chains and also rings on all his fingers might say that the white man finds it vulgar because he – being a black man, has wealth. Of course, that’s simply not the case as it’s just not a part of Anglo sensibility, which teaches us to be sublime – but to call him vulgar is still certainly a way to put him down. Yet, his gold chains demonstrate that he has wealth and is able to retain them on the street, which is a powerful display in American gang culture…….So I would say it is contextual. Does your Lamborghini fit the neighborhood?
I also think your right that some men would see it vulgar because you reverse roles….which only illustrates my point that the concept of vulgarity is in actuality a weapon to defend the status quo.
No offence taking. I agree with you. What I’m trying to say is that from a mechanical and ascetic point of view there is nothing remotely offensive about a Lamborghini. What people object to isn’t even the money spent on it, it’s that it is a status symbol. A girl driving a Lamborghini also threatens some men. That why I think, the problem is more the girl in it than the car.
Does it fit the neighbourhood? No! A major part of our business is hiring out Lamborghini, Ferrari, Alfa Romeo and Maserati sports cars. Security is a major headache and we use attack dogs and armed guard to protect them. Although I’m not complaining, the value of cars in the EU has shot up.
“What I’m trying to say is that from a mechanical and ascetic point of view there is nothing remotely offensive about a Lamborghini.”
No, I don’t think there is – I am a fan of luxury brands…..and I am glad you point out the opposite end of the argument, like fine art, quality is an investment for the future (properly managed, right?).
“What people object to isn’t even the money spent on it, it’s that it is a status symbol.”
Yea, I absolutely believe that and what makes this perspective interesting is the utility of that symbol in the attitude of the luxury consumer and the non-luxury observer.
“A major part of our business is hiring out Lamborghini, Ferrari, Alfa Romeo and Maserati sports cars.”
That’s interesting and I would say your within context to be driving a Lamborghini being that you’re in the business. Luxury interests me because it defies many of the rules of marketing, economics, and psychology (or so it seems). I’m a graduate student right now so I have to take my luxury in small distant doses….but if I find myself in London, I expect a car ride
On another note, I am curious; are your customers mostly affluent or do they rent to experience what they otherwise couldn’t afford. I’m guessing you have both.
“That’s interesting and I would say your within context to be driving a Lamborghini being that you’re in the business.”
That is how I see it: why would not drive a Lamborghini? The reaction I hate most, is from other girls, who assume that I must be fucking a rich a guy to drive a car like that!
” I’m a graduate student right now so I have to take my luxury in small distant doses….but if I find myself in London, I expect a car ride”
Ok
“are your customers mostly affluent or do they rent to experience what they otherwise couldn’t afford. I’m guessing you have both.”
We’re based in Italy but are biggest customer is Rob’s best mate and brother-in-law, Danny, who rents out cars in London. He rents off us and then re-rents them out. We’ve also got quite a few corporate customers and we rent out villas, with use of a sports car, and we offer parachuting, shooting and skiing packages too.
I want to touch on a couple of thoughts to hopefully expand on sometime later…
How can a Lamborghini be vulgar?
Anybody could vulgarize it simply because it’s a high capital status symbol…
There is already the controversy of executives buying or using Lamborghini’s, Picasso paintings, vintage wines, private jets, and spas….Of course the controversy isn’t so much that they buy these things but that they are compensated enough to buy them…
More sublime,
Something that comes to mind: Owning a new car that is a premium brand and living in a ruined down trailer park. This is actually kind of common in the U.S. because the car is cult – thee prime status symbol. I’ve seen the response, “why would anybody want such a nice car and live in a trailer park?”, – a definite vulgarization… It reminds me of the huge mansions you sometimes see in traveler and gypsy communities in the midst of trailers and shanties. This is very interesting because I actually think the vulgarization isn’t about the person exhibiting a status symbol in and of its self but that they do so out of context and this devalues the symbol (or perhaps signifies a misuse)…and, in this singularity we see it as unwholesome, and therefore the person is somehow handicapped. Secondly, these symbols impose such a monumental power display on a community that is significantly below strata and therefore signify somebody who is willing to overtly and openly impose themselves, and this comes across as something rather primal, tyrannical, therefore threatening (perhaps this is why U.S. Politicians rarely drive luxury sport cars).
But in contrast you expect somebody in the glamour business, in the entertainment industry, and in certain affluent neighborhoods to drive premium and luxury brand automobiles.
I was born into a poor working class family, but in the latter part of my childhood we were reasonable wealthy, albeit through illegal means, now we are more wealthy, through legal means. As a family we have adapted to circumstances but still not lost the essence of who we are and where we come from. So for some people I’m arricchita (nouveau riche). So again it’s not the vehicle that is vulgar; it’s the girl driving it, because its a status symbol that is usually beyond the means of a girl born into a working class, cockney, Italian immigrant family. But I don’t encounter that much. People tend to assume I was born into wealth or that I’m dating a rich guy.
“albeit through illegal means”
I had you pegged as the La-Femme Mafia boss
(just teasing) 
“it’s not the vehicle that is vulgar; it’s the girl driving it, because its a status symbol that is usually beyond the means of a girl born into a working class, cockney, Italian immigrant family.”
Very interesting observation that goes back to context and how vulgarity protects the status quo…..but the idea that class mobility is vulgar is vulgar itself
this is a potent power dynamic.
Power = the management of others perceptions.