not in the mood for fashion.

i'm not really one to deal with heavy stuff - either here or in real life. it's just not really my thing. but sometimes it gets to the point where it's hard to talk about shoes, and silhouettes, and prada's s/s '09 line (fabulous, just for the record).

what's going on in victoria at the moment seems to have been one of those things that crept up on me; you imagine things are under control, you miss out on a couple of days of news because you've been otherwise engaged having a gorgeous weekend in the sun (sounds superficial now, i know), then all of a sudden it gets to sunday night, you turn on the news, and everything has gone to shit.

i think most people know at least the basic facts of the story, so i won't go into it. i'm not a huge fan of repeating horrific stories for drama's sake: while it is important that people are wholly aware of what is going on, i think oftentimes victims' stories should be left to those who knew them, those who would take whatever solace they could from hearing about their loved one's last hours. or if not comfort (for in this instance how can it be so?), at least be able to know what happened. i am deliberately not using the word closure here. that approach is usually best left to current affairs shows trying to wring from interviewees every last tear that has not yet been shed. and they do it so well, don't they?

anyway, it has emerged over the last few days that at least some of the fires are suspected to be the result of arson. this is undoubtedly going to sound simplistic, but seriously, what is the matter with people sometimes? say you're an arsonist, what makes you light that fire? my friend greggy told me that arsonists often have erotic reactions to uncontrollable blazes, and so light them purely for the pleasure of sitting in a nearby bush, quietly getting off on blanket destruction.

look, i'm not one to impose my views on how people could and should have a good time. but when a tangential outcome of what you're doing affects innocent individuals to the tune of 130 and rising, i really do have to take issue. and to be honest, it really just gives me the shits. what right do they have to spark something that yields so many victims, to destroy land that is not theirs to annihilate? the seflishness and insensitivity of it is staggering. i suppose we can take comfort from the fact that once they are found (and i don't see how they can't be, seeing that the entire nation is already galvanised to action, baying for, if not blood, then justice)they'll get what they deserve. and yet it doesn't really seem enough - it never really seems enough, actually. just think about port arthur, or bali. retroactive justice cools the blood of the injured and left behind, but can it really, adequately, soothe a family's, or a nation's, grief? It doesn't seem to prevent these occurences engendering feelings of helplessness, or injustice.

i dunno. nothing that i've said here is original, the questions i ask have all been asked before. so i apologise if this post is boring, or preachy, or self-indulgent. it won't happen again. if only the same could be said about what is happening now.

oh my god...

I am guilty of extreme blog neglect. And the funny thing is that I don't even feel that guilty about it. Maybe my friend Eliza has a point when she says I should never have children. My absence is due predominantly to the fact that I've been irresponsibly chasing the summer sun up the east coast of Australia; not thinking about work, writing, styling, going on the dole - nothing. The most taxing thing my mind dealt with for three whole weeks was how often I should reapply my sunscreen (speaking of which, I have a killer tan at the moment. I am skin cells in trauma, but it is worth it.)

Anyway, all the fun and games are over, and I'm back to panicking about what to do for a job, especially in light of the fact that I've decided to move back to London in six weeks, I have no money, no job prospects, and nowhere to live (although I apparently do have an Oxford comma, which must be a start).

As part of my new career kick, I've spent the last few days slaving over a hot mac, putting together a new website. This is mostly because I think my shoot pics clutter up my blog a bit, but also because I see it as a way to separate my fashion styling and writing, and this randomly wandering prose.

So basically this is a pr puff piece. There isn't really any super new material on there, but check out my site and see what you think!

http://gusinboots.googlepages.com/trashglam

chrysalis

Finally, some good news!

Hermes, first stop when looking for gorgeous leather bags, sumptuous silk scarves, and beautifully made riding hats (should the need arise), is apparently not feeling the pinch at all: its share price has risen by almost 16 per cent in 2008, and predicts that its sales will increase by about 10 per cent in 2009.

Must be thanks to the Birkin waiting list, and Posh's personal collection.

and in other depressing news:

LVMH, the world's biggest luxury conglomorate, has binned plans for a new Louis Vuitton megastore, which was to be opened in Tokyo's Ginza district. While it has been predicted that profits in the £165 billion global luxury market should resist going into freefall for the moment, LVMH share values are in decline, with the conglomorate's shares dropping by 44 per cent in 2008.

We thought the 1980s was the time when self-interest reigned supreme: apparently not. There are those in the trade who believe the future of the industry is looking bleak, and that a decade of greed and easy money is to blame. Alain Nemarq, chairman of prestige jewellery firm Mauboussin, said that luxury brands were seduced by the notion that, when it came to prices and profit margins, the sky was the limit: “The pursuit of exclusive trophies ... is finished,” he wrote in Le Figaro last week. “We will now return to reason, decency and discretion.”

even more bad news for chanel...

The global recession seems to be kicking the French marque de grand luxe while it's down, with the house showing 200 of its Paris staff the door. Le Parisien newspaper reports “In the little world of luxury goods, the news has had the impact of a bombshell”.

Up until recently, high-end fashion labels have claimed to be weathering the storm, attributing their success to continuing demand for luxury products from China, Russia, and other emerging economic powers.

But it would appear that the honeymoon is finally over, with even the nouveaux riches steering clearing of Paris' 'golden triangle' boutiques, located off the Champs Élysées. Equivalent high-end fashion locations in New York and London have been similarly deserted, and business in Japan has hit a new low.

Looks like Chanel might have to tighten the belt further still in coming months.

give me 2.55!

... or not. the credit crunch has claimed its latest victim: Chanel's Mobile Art tour. The brainchild of Karl Lagerfeld, this was a touring exhibition of artworks inspired by the design house's iconic 2.55 bag, with Daniel Buren, Sylvie Fleury, Yoko Ono and Wim Delvoye all contributing.

The exhibition, which is housed in a space-age-inspired structure designed by architectural darling Zaha Hadid, made it to Hong Kong, Tokyo and New York, but the tour has faltered before reaching London.

A spokeswoman for Chanel has stated to WWD "Considering the current economic crisis, we decided it was best to stop the project. We will [instead] be concentrating on strategic growth investments."

Despite this setback, Lagerfeld remains unfazed: "Today, everyone can say that something is for financial reasons when they want. For me, artistic reasons are more important. I always thought the building was a sculpture. I prefer it empty."

Luckily for the designer it looks like every bag does have a silver lining. Having said this, the whole financial crisis is getting very boring; does it really have to ruin all our fun? Not impressed.