But then you stumble across pieces… *shrugs*… without it. It’s like finding a really good burger but they forgot the ketchup. Still good, maybe even better for some, but…off somehow.
I was reading some stuff online – all sorts of random articles, you know, the usual scroll-fest (like the stuff you showed me!) – and it seems like Givenchy didn’t even *start* doing jewelry until, like, the late 60s! Which is kinda late to the party, fashion-wise, don’t you think? By then, everyone was already slappin’ logos on everything.
And then there’s the question of *why* go logo-less? Like, is it a deliberate thing? Are we talking, like, anti-establishment vibes here? Or is it just… older stuff? I dunno. Maybe some lines are more about the design itself, the actual artistry, and less about shouting “GIVENCHY!” at everyone within a five-mile radius.
I mean, I get it. Sometimes, you just want something classy and subtle. You don’t always wanna be a walking billboard, right? I think sometimes the logo gets too overwhelming, like, ya know, the brand is wearing you instead of you wearing the brand.
But then again, is it *really* Givenchy if it doesn’t scream “Givenchy” a little? It’s a tough one. Like, if I found a necklace I loved, and it looked *exactly* like something Givenchy would make, but no logo… would I still buy it? Probably. If the price was right, anyway. Let’s be real.
Plus, I’ve seen some stuff that looks like it *should* have a logo, but doesn’t. Makes you wonder if it’s a knock-off, or maybe just a really early piece before they were logo-crazy? Or maybe it’s a special edition, like a secret, little-known thing for the true fashion insiders. Oooooh, mysterious!
