I totally understand and am in agreement with Stella McCartney haters because of the prices on her bags. Hollywood aside, I think I am making a fair generalization by saying that most environmentalist are not fashionistas. There is no “Crunchy Granola” department at Neiman Marcus. If you’re spending close to $1000 on a bag, you’re probably a meat eater. First of all, the word “recycled” to me is synonymous with “affordable” since less resources were expended for it. This shape with the ribbon detail is super cute and totally snob worthy but for $785, I insist that some animal was harmed during the making of it. At Bergdorf Goodman.
Amen Kelly. I’m not paying $800 for plastic.
I belong to the haters side. What you pay just for her name and the ideology is crazy. Needless to say, but I don´t like this bag either.
100% agreed much more affordable(and better looking) vegan options are out there
I think some of you need some intro econ classes to remind you that Stella McCartney is branding herself as a luxury good and part of the deal in remaining in a luxury market is pricing in a competitively expensive manner to encourage the idea that the product is in fact a high class item. It’s the same reason why some idiots spent $200 on Chanel tights; in case no one realized, nylon or even silk is never worth that much and the quality in no way justifies such an absurd price. But would you believe it was Chanel if it only sold for $20? Yeah, didn’t think so. Stella McC clearly wants to be associated with Chanel, and rightly so, not Forever21.
Don’t buy into the facades of other brands and become hypocrites about the ones you don’t like. While I agree that Stella’s designs don’t always hit it out of the park, I do commend her efforts for trying to inject a conscience into the fashion world.
And no, Kelly, being environmentally friendly and fashionable aren’t mutually exclusive and the more ignorant people think only celebrities can live like that the more hope this planet loses of recovery. But hopefully you’ll be surrounded by enough creepy ostrich skin bags not to care.
Stella McCartney should not be trying to encourage the idea that the product is a high class item because it’s not.
First off, I do agree that I am not going to pay for something just because of the label, and I would not spend that kind of money on Stella McCartney items because I personally don’t think they are high quality, and they are mostly not my taste.
I do admit to being someone who is trying to reconcile my love for good quality leather handbags and shoes with my desire to be humane and eco-friendly. I think there is a balance to be achieved, but as of yet I don’t know enough about the leather industry to judge one way or another. So, Kelly, while I do not “insist that some animal was harmed” to make my bag or shoes (That’s a horrible thing to say, by the way. I hope you didn’t really mean that!), I recognize the reality. When I do buy leather products, I try to at least buy from reputable companies, I don’t over indulge, and I use what I buy until it is completely worn out.
I am a vegetarian animal lover (who currently works AT AN ANIMAL SHELTER) who loves premium designer bags, especially crocodile. There I said it.
That being said, I am all for Stella McCartney’s ATTEMPTS at creating bags that are more in line with my lifestyle. She hasn’t quite gotten there yet for me to actually put some money behind my sentiments but each season is getting an eensy bit better. However, there are lots of great eco-friendly bags I have dropped money on (that include dead animals)… mostly recycled leather bags, etc.
See, you CAN be green, have your dead animal and wear it too!
i’d rather go green by purchasing a used birkin or 2.55! what’s more eco-friendly than rocking a bag that was made 10, 15, or even 20 years ago? plus you can sell them or pass them down to your grandchildren. now that’s what i call recycling! i wonder how green stella’s plastic bags are when they fall apart or are soooo last year (because let’s face it…they’re really trendy) and end up in the garbage? lastly, i understand the argument for not killing animals solely for bags, but if they’re slaughtered for food anyway (i.e. cows)….then what’s the big deal?
Kelly….I loved the last line. I also don’t understand how Stella McCartney has the gall to charge so much for PVC. If she wants to go green and not use leather, fine….but do not charge the same amount that a leather or skin bag would cost.
“This shape with the ribbon detail is super cute and totally snob worthy but for $785, I insist that some animal was harmed during the making of it.”
Really? Did you actually write that? as an avid reader of this blog i am now going to boycott it. This is a highly offensive statement to vegan readers. I love fashion, i love handbags even more, i hate the ignorance and harm that goes along with the industry. While i would never tell anyone not to purchase animal related goods i certainly will oppose the horrific outlook you have on the value of animal skins. Lanvin makes beautiful bags in satin that are upwards of $2000 and you featured a vintage gold bar chanel clutch that was priced near $4000. It is good design and ingenuity that allows a handbag to appreciate in value over time. I hope you seriously think about your statement “animals being harmed” the next time you eat filet or take your kid to the petting zoo.
I saw a pair of stella’s version of uggs – of course made of paper..and they were 550 Euros more or less – that is insane! i love her clothes but not the accessories – plastics and paper it’s not fashion for me. that is said for stella’s and chanel plastics too. and i totally agree with Michael St. James opinion above.
Oh My God!!! These comments are better then the post!!! Keep ’em comin’!!!
MSJ…very well said. The better quality the bag, the more it can be reused, handed down, etc. Much better than ending up in a landfill.
yep keep ’em coming! From an eco POV PVC isn’t that great for the environment either. I love smooshy soft leather, but I appreciate SM’s ideals and really come on, how much do people pay for the canvas goyards, LV’s gucci’s etc that are hardly worth their price? if we were to be honest, there is no way any of the bags leather or not are worth their price.
I just about ruined my laptop spitting out water from reading this post. “If you’re spending close to $1000 on a bag, you’re probably a meat eater.” Amazing! HA. Great way to mix up those $1 tacos I just had at Lime.
But seriously; so true.
Unless the bag is made out of a strange exotic material, crafted in a unique way and finished beautifully there is obviously no reason to pay so much…unless you have the money.
Maybe she’s trying to start a trend? Perhaps the high price should include a pamphlet detaling how painstaking it is to make a “luxury” item without harming an animal.
What a broad and frankly insulting generalisation. As a vegetarian and a person with a keen interest in fashion, I’m becoming increasingly disturbed by the opinions spouted by “fashionistas” about issues surrounding animal cruelty and the environmental impact of their vacuous hobby. I find it hilarious that a blog which regularly features utterly overpriced bags can argue about value for money. Look at the Chloe flap bag featured a few posts up. Do you really think that the use of leather justifies the two thousand dollar price tag? It’s very easy to find bags with a similar quality leather for around $500, but people want the Chloe bag because it’s Chloe. Bags made of various animal skins are available at a variety of price points, so I really don’t see any problem at all with Stella’s decision to charge more for a high quality synthetic material.
I also find the durability argument unsupportable because as you so regularly say, bags that are “so last season” rarely stay in a “fashionista”‘s closet for more than six months anyway. If one is going to buy a transitionally fashionable bag it seems a far better idea to buy one which has been ethically made, uses recycled material and can be recycled again. I love fashion, I really do, and have spent far too much indulging my hobby, but the thoughtlessness and sometimes downright cruelty of the industry just makes me sad.
The thigh high Stella Uggs aren’t made of paper, they’re 50% fabric and 50% rubber, and they’re €325.
What I find ironic is that you did not find Lanvin’s Papilotte Satin Shopper overpriced ($1390). I do appreciate it’s your blog and you are more than entitled to have an opinion on the subject but when your posts start to contradict one another then I think it’s time you should re-think what your view really is because at the moment it seems that you can’t make up your mind.
The proportion of vegetarians could be even higher among fashionable people than in the general population, who knows. Claiming that true fashionistas wouldn’t care about the issues concerning animal well-being and environmental responsibilities seems rather ignorant these days. If Stella McCartney by her own example and efforts to offer alternative options makes us think about the ethical questions behind our choices, I think she has achieved something. Even if our choice was a vintage leather bag or a ridiculously priced bag made of exotic skins by another designer. The higher the price of the bag, the more one needs to ponder the purchase. And really. It is not about the quantity.
I laughed a lot when i first read this post.
in case some people havent noticed ( and clearly a lot havent), the line about an animal suffering is meant as a joke not reality ( otherwise Lanvin satin bags would not have being so highly praised here)
I dont like SM acessories, i dont think they are value for money, and as convuluted as it may seem there is indeed an hierarchy about which brands canvas are value for money or just plain trendy mistakes.
Some have commented that the bagsnobs wont complain of the price of a LV canvas but do at SM; well SM doesnt have a 150 year history of being a desirable brand in the market place does it?
Also i find SM take on sustainability hipocritical and a money grabbing scheeme, if she really wants to be ‘green’/ fashion conscious she would make a more classic, and more environment friend materials (natural fibres like silk) acessocies
I completely understand where you are coming from!!! Though we all want to be FABULOUS, it sometimes comes at a cost!! But, after coming upon what you talked about!!! It’s true you can be Enviromentally Friendly and FABULOUS!!!!!
There is no such thing a HIGH QUALITY SYNTHETIC!!!! It’s Synthetic and insane to be chargeing that much for a bag that isn’t worth Label or not!!!!!!
YOU GO GIRL or BOY!!! Whatever you are!!! You hit the nail on the head!!!
I don’t know much about eco to be honest. But I do know it’s a good thing. However, I do believe recyclying can definitely look much better than this and at a much lower price. I don’t care if it’s Stella McCartney, it’s plain ugly. this is a moment when you ask “what the hell was she thinking???”
Really? So there’s no difference between the durability and appearance of the materials used in this bag and a those used in a plastic grocery bag? And the prices charged for a number of bags fabricated from various skins are hugely inflated, I don’t really understand how one can be perfectly accepting of one form of overcharging and being critical of another.
What???????
I am really curious to know where you’ve got your ideas about fashion and vegetarianism mixed up. I spend big bucks on looking good and haven’t eaten meat since I was 6. I’m amazed at the behind-the-times thinking here tbh.
“Crunchy Granola???”
I seriously had to check the date stamp on this post to make sure it wasn’t from the early 90s.
I think you’re getting the wrong end of the stick here- Why is Stella’s bag considered overpriced when a Lanvin bag made out of satin (surely very cheap material) at almost double the price isn’t- is it because Lanvin doesn’t promote eco conscious fashion? In that case great, let’s not be eco conscious and let our houses get flooded and trashed by tsunami thanks to climate change-at least we will drown holding a Birkin bag.
Very interesting comments and in a way all valid.all speak of points worth considering.If Sm wants to be taken seriously as couture handbag designer she should design them better. At vegan store Mooshoes in nyc they do not carry her line as it is too expensive. So where is Sm rationale here? Her prices wre way too high for many girlsto purchase . the proof is in Mooshoes not carrying her line.Her markup is way over the top as is most designers but , unfortunately i hold her to a higher standard .if she is vegan and eco concious and already extremely wealthy she can well afford to lower her prices and make these handbags much more accessible to young vegans.
She is a little out of touch stella is.In regards to couture
fashionista
this is a very interesting and deep thought to ponder. What is true chic? Can we really be truly chic when intentionally causing another creature to suffer .Tragically cows marched across india starved and exhaysted dying and brutally tortured for their leather are not killed for food. we are not like the american indians of old hunting to survive and using the netire animal and praying for the spirit of the dead creature.It is our choice to wear leather or fur ours alone. just do it with conciousness take responsibility for the decision. Know where your leather comes from .If we wear dead bodies on our feet or carry them as bags or wear their skins as our own even if coutured up the yin yang.
it is a thought to ponder.yes i am longtime vegan.serious wearer of couture and a snob ,new yorker and performer
Although I do apologize for trying to be funny with that line, but how is it different than me saying, “I insist that it be leather.”?
Thank you!!
It’s true– since this is made of recycled materials, it has to be cheaper but Stella McCartney, being the popular designer she is, got dibs on the price. I would still purchase bags from trusted stores though http://www.eco-handbags.ca , designer or not. At least I know they’re from recycled materials and their cheap