ideas + images

curated by sierra gonzalez 
Filed under

consumerism

 

Smithsonian teams with QVC

The Smithsonian Institution has entered into a licensing agreement with QVC to develop a jewelry collection based on artifacts in the National Gem and Mineral Collection, a part of the National Museum of Natural History. According to the Washington Post, the line will include a "smaller version of the Hope Diamond", which will retail at $85.

Millions of people visit the museum each year, admiring its beautiful and rare jewelry and gemstone collection. Now our customers can share these national treasures in a very personal way as we give them access to owning jewelry based on items of great historical significance.

—Debra Puzio, QVC's director of merchandising

The Smithsonian's goal is to "create jewelry that is not only fashionable, but also serves to educate the public about the Smithsonian and the jewelry, gems and minerals found in its collections," according to Carol LeBlanc, director of consumer products for Smithsonian Enterprises. As with most other museum stores (see: the Met),  revenue from the Smithsonian's stores (the organization reported a 15% profit margin in 2007) goes back into the institution to support its programs and educational initiatives, but it's not clear if and how QVC would share the profits of this agreement. I also wonder whether shoppers agree with Carol LeBlanc and see their purchases as vehicles for personal edification--or whether it's instead about the perceived prestige of owning an authorized reproduction of a museum-worthy piece. (Or maybe it just looks nice. Who knows?) With the Smithsonian's move to sell their museum-inspired pieces through a third-party, home shopping TV network instead of directly to shoppers on site or online, it seems to dilute the messages of educational and cultural cachet. [Smithsonian and QVC Announce New Jewelry Line | CNN Money]

Filed under  //   branding   consumerism   cultural capital   merchandising   museum   museum store   smithsonian   television  

Comments [0]

On the problem of taste

When you’re choosing furniture for your home that’s supposed to express who you are, what you are also saying is you want other people to infer what you want them to infer. What if they see something different? Wouldn’t it be really depressing if you’re trying to be bohemian and instead they see you as Rush Limbaugh?

—Dr. Sheena Iyengar, Columbia University business professor & author of the famous study demonstrating the paralyzing effect of too many choices

Dr. Iyengar, who is blind, has a standing committee of friends, family and colleagues who provide recommendations on her wardrobe and interior decor. Her goal is both consensus and criticism, since she does not believe in making decisions based solely on her own taste. When making decisions about things that you hope will reflect your own style, “you cannot get to the heart of how things are going to be perceived unless you ask these [external] judges,” Dr. Iyengar believes. Of course, she remains free to ignore her committee's advice. She says, “Everyone is convinced their opinion is the truth, and that’s what I struggle against. But doesn’t everyone?"

Filed under  //   consumerism   fashion   interior design   taste  

Comments [0]