Tiffany’s-stop your fleecing and start treating the Public with respect
The Prelude to Tiffany’s conquest of the gullible public
It was reported that when the Spanish Inquisition first landed at the shores of South America, the first trade that occurred was that of a broken wine bottle bottom.
The locals were so fascinated at viewing the sea through it that they offered a pound of gold jewelry as barter. But wait, it gets interesting here, Dominican Tomás de Torquemada, the merciless taskmaster and slave trader demanded 3 pounds of gold for that broken wine glass bottom, would you believe that? But the irony is, he did get that price.
The reason being, he was able to narrate a touching story line for that broken wine glass bottom. The story was so melancholic that it had the natives grow sentimental, so much so that they melted their gold into this fanatic’s hands.
But did you know as to how this innocence and the gargantuan generosity of the natives were returned by Tomás de Torquemada? With rape, mutilation, enslavement and annihilation of the entire native population.
Now, why are we telling you this History of the Spanish Inquisition? For the simple fact that the actions of Tiffany’s is no different than that of the Fanatic,
Tomás de Torquemada.
Tiffany’s have drawn a lesson or two from this History, that the human nature is ever so gullible that all you ought to do is to pitch a story and then follow it up with some Melodramatic music, bravo !, Now you only need a product to go along with this drama and people would simply sell their all to have this product.
How Tiffany’s is so adept in telling the untold story through, Sound, Movie and hypnotic Music.
Red Bull, the famous energy drink manufacturer was sued for caring an Advertising tag line, “Red bull gives you wings”. The amount ran into multi millions. The contention was based on the premise that drinking Red Bull, provides you with wings, so it is misguiding the gullible public into believing that, after drinking a Red bull, they would leap from Manhattan’s tallest building, singing, “I believe, I can fly, for I now have wings, because of Red Bull”.
Everyone knew, this is the height of Idiosyncrasies on the party that was responsible in bringing this Law suit and more so everyone knew that the reason for this, was to malign the Company and gain some fast buck.
For even a fool would know, that the tag line used by Red Bull, was merely to describe the product’s potency for aiding athletes in performing heavy duty sports training.
Now why are we telling you this, for the simple fact that Tiffany’s in fact does in actuality what Red Bull never did in the first place, and that would be to create the feeling of virtual reality to the gullible public, all based on a 1961 movie, titled, Breakfast at Tiffany’s.
The story revolves around a character, named, Holly, whose only job is to lure affluent men into submission. Yes, that is right, it is unsure whether she gives them the pleasure of sexual intercourse, that the movie doesn’t show, but it sure shows the canny and malice nature of Holly in fleecing these men.
Liken unto the saying two malice attract, so comes the entry of Paul. Whose life is no better than Holly’s, but the only difference being, he is educated and a writer who simply writes without getting paid.
Except that he plays the role of being an employee flesh meat, hired by an older married woman. Who often has intercourse with Paul by paying him secretly.
Of course in aspects, the movie is good, good by every standard established today or should we say, even better and would easily outshine any romantic movie taken today.
Just for Audrey Hepburn’s portrayal of the character, Holly, fantabulously fantastic, a 100 Oscars to her. No matter what the so called acclaimed movie critiques of today would say.
As for the Movie, its actors, its support stars, its production, its direction, its story line, its sound, its Choreography, its Screenplay, and above all its Music, all would easily surpass any of the best movies of 2019 and by any standards set.
Is it fair to capitalize on Audrey’s show of brilliance ?
But is this fair? That even after 50 years, and just because, the beauty queen, Audrey Hepburn, sporting an elegant waist line, adorning a slim sexily seductive gown, that would make any virile man to break his shackles, gets off the cab, with the cab driver never even asking her the money for the drop, walks in all exquisite elegance with her on the top designer sun shades, towards those Tiffany’s & Co, windows, to cast a million dollar glance at those diamond glazed necklaces, with her hand, then gently pulling out a pastry, and a cup of strongly brewed coffee, releasing its passion inform of streams, through her glove ridden hands, with the song, ”Moon River”, the only interjection that any one viewing then would ever permit, being capitalized for business by the Tiffany’s.
It would be too little to say that it was Audrey Hepburn’s elegance, style, charisma and brilliance, that made those lifeless doors of Tiffany’s & Co, into a multi million dollar enterprise. Speaking in all honesty, the collections available for sale at the Tiffany’s cannot be classified as sheer exotic or marvelous. On the contrary, stores which are either on par or better still than the Tiffany’s hold better exquisite collections for sale to the general public.
More so, any door would have captured the imagination of the audience, for all that mattered and counted there, was the brilliance of Audrey Hepburn.
The question to ask here would be, when it was Audrey Hepburn, who worked the magic of brilliance, then why on earth is Tiffany’s capitalizing the work of someone else.
Give the Movie Crew or their families, the rightful due
More so, why not rather innovate a better mannered splendid elegance today for the audience of today to cherish and rejoice. Why keep churning the old curd again and again and again.
Not doing so only goes to show either of the two things, one, Tiffany’s just doesn’t have that creativity to spurn out the charm, two, Tiffany’s had no part to play in the original show case of the door and the brilliance that came along in the movie. Thus they were the handy and the hard work of the Movie crew.
In either of these situation, Tiffany’s, is obligated to pay part of the collected Royalties and Profits, to all of the crew who were part of creating that 1961 elegance. Why? Because, this is that very door that has gone to become the oracle and mouthpiece for Tiffany’s, in showcasing their brand.
There is no real creativity in Tiffany’s creation
In one of the exhibit’s designs, Tiffany’s claims that inclusion of fruits in its Necklace designs were unique and original. But this is debatable.
From a casual look at many of religious books of the Jews would reveal that a clear narrative description is given as to how to design artifacts and jewelry that were meant to be worn by the Chief and the High priest during ceremonies and holy feast times.
The contention that we wish to place here is this, when one has clearly obtained the blueprint for the Necklace designs from elsewhere, then how on earth can Tiffany’s claim to originality of their design be acceptable?
This is just one of the many ambiguities of assumptions that are visibly functional but yet still there are many. On one of the Jewel’s description, the write up states that these exquisite stones were sourced from European royals.
We have just one problem with that, that would be, why have they not mentioned the names of these sources. We live in an age where the right to information has to be solicited by any company performing business with the public. For we ought to know if the source is free from the violation of any human rights. For it is widely reported that most of the blood diamonds from Africa, find their way into the US market through Europe. The last thing we want to do would be to promote the purchase and trade of such gems and stones that have their past written in blood.
Tiffany’s Security personnel will intimidate and threaten you
Most of the exhibition centers where Tiffany’s hold their exhibitions are riddled with their so called Security personnel. These securities are purposefully instructed to intimidate the public.
These security personnel have this thought process that they are protecting the US treasury Fort Knox, and with this thought, they go on a public enemy behavior.
The irony is, no one has even the feeblest of voices to raise an objection to their behavior. Some of their atrocities would include abruptly body touching on pretext that they are controlling the crowd. Coming up right in front of you with intimidation eye glances. Frequent yells and shouts irrespective of children being around. Answer questions with unfriendly and impolite replies and the lists adds up every minute depending individual experiences.
In brevity, their presence will make you feel that you are a worm at their whims and fancies, with the fear of being trampled always looming in the air.
The feeling of suffocation is so much intolerable that the minute to venture out of the exhibition venue, you would begin to question yourself as to why in the very first place you ought to pay to get insulted.
The fleecing continues
There is this much important question to ask here, if your sole revenue generating is based on Audrey Hepburn’s star display in the movie, then how much money earned through international exhibitions and memorabilia sales does actually go to those who made that movie possible.
From the last time we witnessed such an Exhibition, the entrance fee for the ordinary commoner was around $5, but for the VIP, the rates were still higher. We choose to go along the commoner way and found that not less than 10,000, people visited the center before the day ended.
With at least an hour wait before we enter. The plight gets even bad, the rooms were badly lit, so bad that you can hardly see your own hand in the room. Mirrors were erected to give you the feeling that the exhibits were elaborately displayed, other than a piece of card called a description manual, nothing worth the $ 5 was ushered.
Okay with all that being said we would like to know, where does the money go?
