Copyright 2014 by Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. For reprints, call HBS Publishing at (800) 545-7685.

BH 609

Business Horizons (2014) 57, 371—380

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

t
ScienceDirect

os
www.elsevier.com/locate/bushor

rP
The artification of luxury: From artisans to artists
Jean-Noël Kapferer 1

HEC Paris, 78350 Jouy en Josas, France

KEYWORDS
Luxury;
Art;
Culture;
Fashion; yo
Abstract Growth is the biggest challenge for a luxury brand in that volume dilutes
the brand cachet. In addition, it violates the credo of rarity on which the luxury sector
is originally based. This article reveals how the current leading luxury brands use
‘artification,’ a process of transformation of nonart into art, to circumvent
the volume problem. Artification takes time and substantial investment. It cannot
op
Growth; be undertaken by the brands alone: It requires the active collaboration of art
Status; authorities and renowned artists. The goal is to change the status of the brand, of
Masstige its founder and products, and in so doing, to reinforce the idea of a better-than-
ordinary brand whose price and symbolic power are undisputed. It is also strategic for
the globalization of luxury: Art is universal.
# 2014 Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All
rights reserved.
tC

1. The challenge of growth for luxury
companies
Growth is the biggest challenge for a luxury brand.
Luxury brands should not endeavor to remain small,
yet they face a real challenge of growing while
No
companies use it, even if they are fashion houses
or premium brands. However, ‘luxury,’ ‘fashion,’ and
‘premium’ are not substitutable; they refer to three
totally different ways of managing a company
(Kapferer & Bastien, 2012). The popularization and
overuse of the word ‘luxury’ thus blurs distinctions

remaining a luxury brand. This statement may
come as a surprise; recent headlines have marveled
at the economic story of the luxury sector–—one that,
despite the global recession, has continued to grow,
reaching s212 billion in sales in 2012 (Bain & Co.,
2013). However, this understanding of the sector
presupposes that it refers to luxury brands; in reality,
the ‘luxury sector’ is a macroeconomic entity com-
prised of heterogeneous companies and products,
Do
and creates managerial confusion. Even Starbucks
coffee has been described as ‘‘romance, relaxation
and luxury’’ (Clark, 2007, p. 94). It would be more
accurate to use words such as ‘gourmet’ or the good/
better/best hierarchy to describe these products,
and use ‘luxury’ only in its narrow meaning.
For a premium or fashion brand, growth poses no
difficulties: the more the better. For example, mas-
stige brands, such as Ralph Lauren’s mass-produced
clothes, are of good quality and made at low pro-

only a few of which follow a luxury strategy. Because

the word ‘luxury’ has become fashionable, many
E-mail address: kapferer@hec.fr
1
Pernod-Ricard Chair on the Management of Prestige Brands
duction costs in China. Value is created by prestigious
retail stores made to resemble a mansion, material-
izing the American dream. To access this dream, the
brand offers such items as a panoply of clothes

0007-6813/$ — see front matter # 2014 Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2013.12.007

This document is authorized for educator review use only by SOFIA ESQUEDA, IESA Venezuela until Apr 2020. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
 372
inspired by the Hollywood movie The Great Gatsby,
which evokes East Coast gentry, itself inspired by
English aristocracy. Volume is not a problem.
The problem of growth for luxury brands is that
supply should always be below demand; thus,
growth is sought after, but cautiously. This goal is
especially salient currently, as luxury brands face
surges of demand in developing economies like the
BRIC countries: Brazil, Russia, India, and China.
Meeting such demand could mean banalization, loss
of luster (Thomas, 2008), and a loss of exclusivity–—
all preambles to the loss of premium pricing power.
To mitigate this risk, some luxury brands limit
their volume. For example, Rolls Royce has indi-
cated that in 2013, it aims to sell just one car more
than was sold in 2012, emblematic of a strategy that
concentrates on the multiplication of custom-made
yo
products. At Hermès, Chief Executive Officer Patrick
Thomas insists that ‘‘as soon as a product sells too
much, it is discontinued,’’ though it appears this
rule applies to bags and silk scarves, not to watches
and fragrances, which are sold through wholesale
channels to multibrand retailers.
This article analyzes a transformation of luxury
that aims at solving the growth dilemma: to become
op
bigger while keeping a luxury strategy, and meet
mounting demands that can attract new competitors.
This transformation is also motivated by the need to
reinforce the legitimacy of the luxury sector as a
whole. All sectors must defend their right to exist; it
is never given a priori. As long as there has been
luxury, there have been moral criticisms of its ex-
tC
cesses and its cultivation of inequality. These latent
criticisms have been revitalized as a result of the
pervasive presence of luxury in today’s society.
In turn, I argue that the growing multiplication of
associations of luxury brands with artists, galleries,
and museums is not accidental. Luxury brands are
actually engaging in a subtle process of ‘artification,’
No
the transformation of nonart into art. The luxury
industry aims to be perceived as a creative industry.
With this article, I therefore begin by diagnosing
the problems created by luxury growth and analyze
how and why art can answer these challenges. Then I
explore the concept of artification, the process of
transforming a brand into an example of art. I
conclude with a discussion of how several luxury
brands have implemented this strategy.
Do
2. The radical transformation of
luxury today
Luxury has become fashionable, and its status
in society has radically changed. Etymologically,
the word luxury means ‘‘overabundance, excess,
This document is authorized for educator review use only by SOFIA ESQUEDA, IESA Venezuela until Apr 2020. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
J.-N. Kapferer
beyond necessity.’’ For centuries, luxury was limited
t
to the happy few. It was the exclusive lifestyle of
those in power: pharaohs; kings, queens, and their
os
courts; and later merchants and industrialists. It was
meant to express refined taste and impress crowds
by the magnificence of the palaces, horse carriages,
dresses, jewels, and so on. This origin is latent today
in consumers’ psyches; asked to mention what prod-
ucts come to their minds when they hear the word
rP
luxury, consumers do not talk about watches or
leather bags but mention yachts, helicopters, pri-
vate islands, and supercars–—that is, an idealized
lifestyle accessible only to the wealthiest. This very
specific luxury–—called ‘überluxury’–—does exist,
but is confined to a select few consumers.
Luxury is a microeconomic sector that has grown
over the past 20 years, slowly extending its custom-
er base beyond the happy few to the happy many,
the so-called middle class. This is why this sector is
growing fast and captures so much corporate and
media attention. Considering China alone, the size
of the world’s largest middle class, with earnings
between U.S. $10,000 and U.S. $60,000, is esti-
mated at 300 million people (Wang & Wei, 2010).
The challenge for luxury brands is determining what
to do with this tsunami of demand.
In Asia, where the growth of this market is most
notable, a radical transformation has taken place in
which, paradoxically, luxury is no longer a luxury but
instead has become a seeming necessity–—as man-
ifested by the queues of Chinese tourists in front of
Louis Vuitton flagship stores in many major cities.
There are many reasons for this radical transforma-
tion, which represents not a democratization of
luxury (through lower prices) but rather a democ-
ratization of the desire for luxury at high prices:
 In emerging countries, growth is accompanied by
urbanization, which creates a context of high
competition. People need to define their identi-
ties to themselves and others.
 Booming economies develop meritocracy and so-
cial stratification, so people need clear hierarchies
to identify how high they stand or wish to be
perceived. These hierarchies rely on not only pos-
sessions but also well-known prestige brands.
 Unlike western consumers, Asian consumers buy
luxury not to differentiate themselves but to
avoid being considered socially below others.
Japan, Korea, and China are competitive econo-
mies, at both macroeconomic and individual lev-
els. Each person feels an obligation to succeed to
gain esteem from others (Chaddah & Husband,
2007), which affects their major consumption
 The artification of luxury: From artisans to artists
choices, including their children’s education. Suc-
cess must be visible and the markers unambiguous
and respected. Thus, Asian consumers consider
wearing a luxury suit, watch, or leather accessory
a necessity to maintain face, a universal social
visa. This trait also explains the growing counter-
feit economy: Counterfeits are the poor consum-
ers’ luxury, their way to adhere to the norm. Fake
products are the gateway before trading up to
authentic products.
3. How growth creates two major
problems for luxury brands
Growth is a blessing for all profitable brands. For
luxury brands, it is a mixed one though. Growth is
yo
not an issue for premium brands (e.g., top German
automotive brands), which in principle do not set
volume limits but instead seek to gain market share
and new consumers by always improving their prod-
ucts’ performance and services. Similarly, fashion
brands extend their distribution to seize this source
of growth.
In contrast, luxury brands represent much more
op
than products, regardless of their performance.
They reflect the taste of elites. By extending from
the happy few to the happy many, luxury brands
moved from the ordinary of the extraordinary peo-
ple to the extraordinary of the ordinary people. As a
consequence, the first challenge for luxury brands is
finding a way to grow while still appealing to extra-
tC
ordinary consumers, those who ensure the long-
term desirability of the brand.
To keep the wealthiest clients while extending
their customer base, luxury brands permanently
raise their average price level. They also limit the
number of accessible items for luxury ‘excursion-
ists,’ who do not typically buy luxury items but may
No
splurge. Another option is dual management: spe-
cializing labels with their own lines and retail net-
work, one of which is extremely expensive and
highly selective and the other that is more acces-
sible (e.g., Armani Privè vs. Emporio Armani, Ralph
Lauren Black Label vs. Polo RL). The selective labels
continue to develop sophisticated rare products,
limited editions, and special orders.
Growth creates a second problem for luxury
brands. Booming demand for high-quality, expensive
Do
goods attracts many new competitors that challenge
the classical luxury brands with innovative business
models. For example, Chanel and Vuitton are cur-
rently challenged by Coach. The situation is acute in
developing economies, in which new luxury consum-
ers have not learned the hierarchy of brands. In
these economies, consumers are not loyal to brands,
This document is authorized for educator review use only by SOFIA ESQUEDA, IESA Venezuela until Apr 2020. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
373
lacking knowledge about why they should stay with
t
brand A instead of brand B. The differences between
the products are not evident, and neither are
os
the brands’ advertising messages or retail store
experiences. For example, Coach’s website reads,
‘‘Artisans and innovators, we continually refine and
perfect our collections to create some of the most
luxurious handbags in the world.’’ Chanel, Prada, or
Bottega Venetta could write the same words.
rP
How then can luxury brands mark their distance
and recreate the gap between luxury and masstige?
New luxury brands face similar issues. For example, in
the champagne market, Jay Z’s brand Arnaud de
Brignac and Mariah Carey’s brand Angel have gained
widespread recognition in the African American com-
munity due to the active presence of these two
celebrities in the media and on social networks. This
link offers a challenge to Veuve Clicquot champagne,
which has long aimed at a similar audience of young,
active, female consumers. These new brands attract
new consumers who either do not embrace a tradi-
tional culture or just want to switch away from classic
brands.
The challenge for luxury brands is to create dis-
tance from these attractive innovative newcomers.
Unlike a premium strategy, the luxury difference is
not created by proofs but by beliefs. Proofs call for
direct comparisons with competitors about the prod-
ucts, the tangible part of the brand, which would
entail stepping down from the pedestal and putting
the luxury brand at the premium brand’s level (Amal-
doss & Jain, 2005). Luxury brands compete instead
on their intangibles: They must educate consumers
to regain their undisputed symbolic authority, the
basis of their price (Karpik & Scott, 2010). To do so,
luxury brands must remind consumers of their
legendary roots, the mythical history that sets them
apart. Whereas celebrities are a form of fashion,
luxury cannot be ephemeral. Instead, it provides a
bridge between the past and the future.
4. Luxury growth and the rising issue
of legitimization
Luxury has always been more or less morally con-
demned. The Greek philosopher Aristotle talked
about luxury to criticize it, associating it with vice.
Centuries later, the Latin writers Seneca and Cicero
saw luxury as an early sign of Roman decline. Today,
these criticisms still exist, latent and sometimes
explicit. Even luxury buyers tend to feel somewhat
uncomfortable with luxury. In the IPSOS World
Luxury Tracking Survey, a global assessment of
the worldwide luxury market conducted by a
well-known opinion research institute, the sample
 374
of respondents is limited to those persons able
to afford buying luxury goods (e.g., 2% of the
population in China, 50% in Europe or the United
States). According to survey results, across all coun-
tries more than 60% of respondents agreed with the
statement ‘‘living in luxury is a superficial life’’
(www.ipsos. com). Although people like luxury and
sometimes adore it, most share this sense of conflict.
In ancient Greece, the moral condemnation of
luxury came from philosophers. Today, it comes
from other sources: moralists, politicians, and ad-
vocates of sustainable development. Because luxury
is an economic sector, with companies listed and
tracked on international stock exchanges, it is sub-
ject to the obligation of permanent growth (though
family companies experience less of this pressure).
Thus, luxury seems to be everywhere today: in
yo
magazines, in airports, and on the high streets of
all major cities, as well as in regional cities.
This expansion of luxury may seem shocking in
emerging economies. In these countries, the majority
of the population still lives in poverty, and a minority
shows that they are already well-off by consuming
expensive goods and brands conspicuously. In a coun-
try where 63% live on less than $1 a day, figures from
op
the research company Euromonitor (www.euromoni-
tor.com) show that Nigeria had the fastest growing
rate of champagne consumption in the world, second
only to France, and ahead of several BRIC nations and
mature markets such as the United States.
In 2012, China banned luxury advertising in
Beijing, whose streets were formerly flooded with
tC
luxury billboards. According to Chinese authorities,
these ads created a politically unhealthy climate:
They were not only too ostentatious but also a
painful reminder of the wide gap between rich
and poor. The ads, and the luxury goods they pro-
moted, represented for many a misuse of public
money, incorrect values, and a bad social ethos.
No
One side effect of this ban was that it drove luxury
brands to make more use of digital and social media
than before, sparking the birth of video websites
that provide both entertainment and information.
If luxury is the smoke, social inequality is the fire
in this controversy. Luxury as a visible economic
sector must address its collective image and its
perceived legitimacy–—just as all economic sectors
must manage their reputations, which determine
their right to operate freely. When this reputation is
Do
lost, the business is endangered.
5. Why art now? Becoming an industry
The luxury market’s growing desire to be held as art
is not because it is art, but rather because it needs
to be viewed as art, today more so than ever before.
This document is authorized for educator review use only by SOFIA ESQUEDA, IESA Venezuela until Apr 2020. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
J.-N. Kapferer
Why? The problems identified previously are part of
t
the answer. In addition, luxury has moved from the
idealized family business to that of a concentrated,
os
very profitable industry.
Thus far, the luxury sector has thrived on an
ideological storytelling based on craftsmanship, rar-
ity, uniqueness, one-to-one personalization, exclu-
sivity, feelings of privilege, and boutiques. The
central figure in this storytelling is the artisan.
rP
Whereas in ancient Greece there was no difference
between artists and artisans, since the 16th century,
artists have been considered free of any constraint:
They create art for the sake of art, an idealistic
search of beauty that reflects emotion. Artisans
master the tekhnè, the art of handmade reproduc-
tion of fine objects according to specific know-how.
They must be loyal to a model. Certainly, artisans
must learn how to be creative when filling special
orders–—how to bring aesthetics and uniqueness
applied to functional products for a single client.
Can the iconic image of the artisan survive the
reality of today? Luxury is an industry, and an in-
dustry is about reproduction. In 2009, Louis Vuitton
launched a world advertising campaign called
savoir-faire (know-how), highlighting the work of
the firm’s craftspeople. Such a campaign was
needed to provide a counterweight to the growing
image of Vuitton as a mass-produced, luxury mega-
brand. The United Kingdom’s Advertising Standards
Agency even banned Louis Vuitton from using two of
its ads, maintaining that these images misled con-
sumers to believe the label’s products were hand-
made, when the majority of the bags, wallets, and
other accessories that Louis Vuitton is known for
have been crafted by machine. Allusions to crafts-
manship thus can backfire.
In the past, luxury firms were family businesses,
mostly local, with a focus on the core product.
Today, luxury is managed by groups, fully global,
with a focus on retail and a commitment to expand
the brand’s range and diversify, thus abandoning
rarity and sometimes even relocating2. The artifi-
cation process thus is timely for a sector that is
becoming increasing less artisanal.
6. A short history of the relationship
of art and luxury
Art and luxury have been related since ancient
times, moving from close proximity to frontal
opposition and now to a renewed collaboration.
2
Zegna has factories in Spain, Switzerland, Mexico, Turkey, and
now China; Prada manufactures in China, a challenge for the
magical label ‘‘made in Italy.’’
 The artification of luxury: From artisans to artists
Historically, there was no art without the support
and protection of the powerful elite; for centuries,
in Western civilization, painting was exclusively
religious, and its purpose was to diffuse the mes-
sages of Catholicism on the walls of cathedrals and
churches. In an illiterate world, these images were
essential for the celebration of God and the saints.
Later, with the Renaissance movement, the Medici
family of Florence stimulated a renewal of the arts
and created some distance from religious motifs.
Seduced by Italy, French King François I contracted
with artists to decorate his palaces and castles.
Other aristocrats became eager to bolster their
fame and prestige through the development of art.
The 19th century marked an abrupt departure:
the advent of a new conception of art, called ‘Art for
Art,’ devoid of any commercial goal, with a clear
yo
desire to be iconoclastic and challenge classic forms
of art. The movement arguably began with the
provocative ‘Olympia’ by Manet and extended to
Picasso’s cubist paintings and other nonfigurative
contemporary artists. The notion of an artist
changed as well: Van Gogh had become the symbol
of the damned artist, living in poverty, refusing the
world of money and rejecting the conventional
op
system.
Since then, art and money have nourished intri-
cate ties, if only in the sense that visionary mer-
chants collected paintings that critics later
recognized as major artwork, which prompted pri-
vate collectors and museums to compete for the
possession of these unique pieces. It is significant
tC
that museums have now become places of mass
enlightenment–—the ‘churches of Sunday after-
noon’–—whereby art is now consumed by all. This
shift indicates that the status of art itself has dras-
tically changed in society, such that creation has
become endowed with prestige.
Perhaps the most emblematic version of the
No
changing relationship between artists and money
is the life of Andy Warhol. He called his studio Andy
Warhol Factory, meaning he had no problem with the
notion of technical reproduction as art. In addition,
he was the first to identify the process of artifica-
tion: When an art gallery exhibited his painting of a
simple Brillo Box, this action bestowed the status of
art on his work. Luxury brands have learned this
lesson. Art is that which is consecrated as such by
institutions of art. One of the Warhol’s quotes even
Do
specifies the opposition between art and money:
‘‘You know it’s art when the check clears,’’ such that
there is somebody to pay for it. Subsequent super-
stars such as Jeff Koons, Damien Hirst, and Stephen
Sprouse similarly have blurred the lines between art
and business. They willingly become part of the
system, lending their own fame to luxury brands.
This document is authorized for educator review use only by SOFIA ESQUEDA, IESA Venezuela until Apr 2020. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
375
7. What’s in art for luxury?
t
Because the luxury industry has subsidized art, help-
os
ing artists work, it seems reasonable for the industry
to expect something in return. Art can bring luxury a
much needed moral and aesthetic endorsement,
noncommercial connotations, and a paradoxical le-
gitimization of its high prices. Artification helps this
sector downplay the social stratification motivation
rP
of consumer demand and foster more humanistic
motivations, such as elevation by objects that con-
dense highly talented artists’ work, tradition and
culture, art and creativity, and timelessness. These
motivations justify people’s desire to possess these
objects: They want access to beauty and depth, a
justification welcomed by this industry. Because art
is the apex of human activity, associating luxury
brands with it can help sustain the gap between
luxury brands and new competitors or brands that
imitate the codes of luxury. Art reinforces their
symbolic authority.
On practical grounds, art and luxury share several
characteristics. Both are expensive creations and
aim at the same target: the cultural elite. Luxury,
like art, aims at immortality, or at least timeless-
ness, because ‘‘life is short; art lasts,’’ according to
Oscar Wilde. The value of art grows with time. How
can art achieve this feat? It does so by being totally
independent of function. A painting has no literal
function, so it can endure the effects of time.
Function creates temporality and a built-in obsoles-
cence; for example, early versions of the iPhone no
longer have value. The same effect holds true for
fashion, which is invariably of its time and mortal.
For this reason, luxury must stay out of the fashion
realm. Just as art has, luxury must de-correlate
price and function. Although a handbag remains a
bag, as a piece of art, its price must be totally
independent of its function. The distance between
art and function enhances brand extensibility and
entry into new categories–—thus far limited by asso-
ciations to specific know-how (Hagtvedt & Patrick,
2008).
Because most economic growth is created by new
companies and new entrepreneurs, luxury’s growth
is necessarily based on new money. However, luxury
brands must anticipate the fast evolution of these
buyers. In addition, being associated with conspic-
uous consumption alienates the creative elite, the
influential consumers, and the people designing
the future. It is important to demonstrate that
the brand does not segment only on the basis of
money but also considers culture, intelligence, and
the ability to value artwork.
How can luxury brands keep extraordinary people
loyal to the brand? The best answer may be to give
 376
them the ability to distinguish themselves from other
clients of the brand and demonstrate their capacity
to enjoy aesthetically cultural works, which ennobles
the money they have. These happy few are quickly
moving toward postmaterialistic luxury. They already
own Ferraris, dozens of Hermès bags, a Rolex Oyster
Perpetual, yachts, and so on, so they have little left to
prove. They expect incredible experiences (e.g.,
travel, services); culture, if it is truly rare, may also
grow in value. Art elevates humankind and makes the
human species unique; it also cannot be criticized.
Art aims for the elite features of all people, regard-
less of their wealth, not at a specific elite class
characterized by its wealth. Finally, art takes people
to a higher level of meaning.
These traits explain why luxury needs art. Through
art and the signature of artists, luxury–—criticized for
yo
becoming the science of artificial rarity (Kapferer,
2012)–—transforms limited editions into authentic
artworks, not mere techniques to create demand.
When Louis Vuitton creates a s1 million necklace for
its new, high-end jewelry collection, the value is
not in the number of diamonds–—a trite measure of
value–—but the time and creativity required to design
and make this piece of art under the artistic direction
op
of Lorenz Bäumer, one of world’s leading jewelry
designers and now the head of Louis Vuitton’s high-
end jewelry line. The artist endows the object with
timelessness, substance, and cultural and temporal
thickness. It is ideal for communication, and far less
superficial than the use of mere celebrities.
Ultimately, art is universal. That is, it is an elitist
tC
language that crosses frontiers. The following sec-
tions thus explore the importance of this universal-
ity for a brand’s entry into a new country.
8. Entering new countries through art
No
How should luxury brands enter promising new mar-
kets such as China and India? Formerly, luxury brands
had an immediate solution: hire a local agent to
import and distribute products. Today’s luxury
brands need a longer-term vision. The issue is not
simply penetration but setting the bar high, estab-
lishing brand noncomparability, and acquiring pres-
tige among influential consumers. In this setting, an
art exposition may be more effective than adver-
tisements to demonstrate a brand’s values or create
Do
links with local cultural elites and opinion leaders.
The first impressions created among opinion leaders
in the country are those that last. Hermès has
developed a specific approach to be perceived as
arriving as a guest, not a conqueror. The brand seeks
to avoid an image as a predator, only interested in
making money by selling high-priced items. Instead,
This document is authorized for educator review use only by SOFIA ESQUEDA, IESA Venezuela until Apr 2020. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
J.-N. Kapferer
it pays homage to the culture of the hosting country.
t
For example, Hermès entered China by organizing a
successful exhibition in the Forbidden City titled
os
‘Heavenly Horses,’ which celebrated the ancient
culture of horses in China. That Hermès began as
a saddle-maker and that its logo is a horse carriage
helped establish a link. The exhibition attracted
more than 1 million visitors, and Hermès created
a bridge between its brand and one of the oldest arts
rP
and traditions of China, appealing to the country’s
political, cultural, and artistic elite. Cartier used a
similar approach when entering India: It paid tribute
to the old and uniquely Indian aristocratic tradition
of playing polo with elephants.
Culture is also a bridge between countries.
Luxury brands aim to be recognized not as product
makers but as active elements of the culture and
ambassadors for a country’s art. Art allows collab-
oration with foreign artists.
8.1. A forerunner of artification: Louis
Vuitton in Japan
Although currently China is perceived as the center
of growth for Louis Vuitton, Chinese consumers are
only just discovering what Japanese white-collar
workers found out some 30 years ago when Japan
was the main market for luxury. Louis Vuitton’s
Japanese experience summarizes both its past suc-
cess and future challenges. As they became widely
available through an ever-increasing network of
directly operated stores and shops-in-shops, Louis
Vuitton products lost their appeal for Japanese
consumers. In a highly developed country such as
Japan, the cost of losing the support of the local
elite or tastemakers is high. In luxury, success has
costs–—namely, overdiffusion and overpenetration.
As early as 2000, Louis Vuitton identified a solution
for its Japanese market: launching an art strategy.
How can art reinforce the brand’s aura and help
renew the customer base? Although no figures docu-
ment an actual return on art investment, artifica-
tion can create value in four major ways:
 Producing a continually renewing contemporary
image of a brand proud of its heritage.
 Presenting the brand as an advanced cultural
agent, not a commercial one.
 Reducing the obligation of rarity in the era of
reproducible works of art (Benjamin, 2010).
 Creating a barrier to entry against newcomers,
such as creative brands managed by younger
designers.
 The artification of luxury: From artisans to artists
In the 2000s in Japan, Louis Vuitton, Hermès, and
Chanel enacted a proactive strategy. These brands
had embedded contemporary exhibition spaces in
their new flagship stores. Maison Hermès Ginza
opened in 2001 and has held contemporary art
exhibitions regularly, renewing its shows two to five
times a year. Louis Vuitton built its flagship on
Omote-sando in 2002. Chanel followed with its
2004 flagship in Ginza, also devoting a whole floor
to cultural activities such as classical concerts and
art exhibitions. By substituting themselves for well-
respected institutions (i.e., museums), the brands
gained credentials and protected themselves. They
projected the image of providing artistic enlighten-
ment to Japan’s elites, creating a cultural reminder
that art gives the power to lead.
yo
8.2. Artifying the founder: The
Chanelization of Coco Chanel
Another route for the artification of a luxury house is
to artify the founder. If it can be demonstrated that
he or she was an artist, it follows that all his or her
works are art and not simply products. This is the
op
present strategy adopted by Chanel.
From May 5 to June 5, 2013, at Palais de Tokyo, a
museum of modern art in Paris, an exhibition called
N85 Culture Chanel was held. The show represented
the iconic fragrance within the context of the avant
garde artistic movements prevailing in 1922, when
Chanel N85 was conceived and created. It was not an
tC
isolated case. In November 2011, at the National Art
Museum of China in the center of Beijing, another
exhibition, Culture Chanel, explored the roots of
Gabrielle ‘Coco’ Chanel’s inspiration and personal
life, starting from when she was a child. These
exhibitions provided exclusive, highly informative
images that fuel Chanel’s brand content strategy.
No
Images from the exhibition also were available on
the Internet and through social media.
Chanel also planned a tour of world capitals with
a unique traveling exhibition: the Mobile Art Chanel
Contemporary Art Container, designed by architect
Zaha Hadid.3 Placing the Chanel brand at the center
of Paris, in the heart of China, and at the apex of
contemporary art and contemporary relevance,
these outward manifestations are unified by one
purpose: to endow Coco Chanel with the status of
Do
a cultural icon.
The process is based not on information but on
celebration. To paraphrase Marshall McLuhan, the
3
Because of the economic downturn this project was
postponed.
This document is authorized for educator review use only by SOFIA ESQUEDA, IESA Venezuela until Apr 2020. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
377
medium is the message. To achieve creative cred-
t
ibility and credibility based on heritage, it is vital
that the brand be presented in noncommercial
os
settings; national museums are not places, they
are institutions and agents of consecration. The
historical figure of Coco Chanel is not important.
Although historians have revealed positive and neg-
ative aspects of her life (e.g., Vaughn, 2012), reality
does not engage people as much as legends. The
rP
company’s aim was the sanctification of the person,
a necessary preamble for encouraging people to
view the products that Chanel created as pieces
of art, including Chanel N85, beyond the purely
commercial products of other brands in the market.
These large-scale exhibitions from Paris to Beijing
were designed to create incomparability and su-
premacy, to portray Chanel as different than all
followers in the market. The goal is not to compete
on the basis of the products themselves but rather to
accumulate symbolic capital. To become a cult
brand, the luxury brand needs a saint. His or her
products become endowed with magic, regardless
of the number sold, thus releasing the constraint
created by the rarity principle that blocks the
growth of luxury brands.
As Heinich and Leduc Browne (1997) rightly point
out, the process of postmortem transformation is a
self-fulfilling prophecy in that it produces what it
claims to acclaim. In other words, if a person is
celebrated, it must be that he or she deserves it.
Coco Chanel was a great person because she is ad-
mired, not vice versa. Who she really was is no longer
the issue. The queue of people at the museums must
be the reflection of the grandeur of the person.
Coco Chanel thus is being ‘Chanelized.’ While
visiting the Beijing exhibition, I was struck by the
mise-en-scène, the staging of the exposition: huge
rooms, all in black, with such a paucity of objects
that even the most trivial felt highly significant–—
relics in a silent church. A photograph of a stained
glass chapel window not only reveals that Chanel
attended Catholic school but also suggests a more
divine inspiration. The pattern of interlaced motifs
is almost immediately recognizable as the inter-
laced Cs of the future Chanel logo. Is it a mystery,
or a signal of some kind of predestination? In another
room, a book emblazoned with Chanel’s face ap-
pears on a shelf labeled, Queens of France, thus
identifying her as an aristocrat of modern taste.
Yesterday in Paris, tomorrow in another major
city, the N85 Culture Chanel exhibition takes a
different tact, showing all the famous artists that
Coco Chanel had opportunities to meet. Retroac-
tively, these sculptors, painters, and musicians
seem to have knighted her, seem to have included
her in their closed circle, thus transforming her
 378 J.-N. Kapferer

status of seamstress and dressmaker into one of brand’s proximity to artists and their integration in

t
creator–—not of dresses but of pieces of art. Chanel’s the value chain. Artists have collaborated with
goal is to grant noncommercial essence to its best- luxury houses for a long time, though mostly

os
sellers: here, to Chanel N85 perfume. sporadically. The greatest rival to Coco Chanel,
the innovative and visionary Elsa Schiaparelli, a
9. How artification involves all art fashion designer from the late 1920s to mid-
1950s, was influenced by her friends Salvador Dali,
institutions Man Ray, and Marcel Duchamp (Blum, 2003). She in
turn influenced the works of Yves Saint-Laurent and

rP
To be credible, the process of artification must
John Galliano (Dior), who introduced newspaper
involve the institutional actors of the art world.
prints and trompe l’œil draping in his collections.
They are the ambassadors of luxury brands in this
In 1965, Yves Saint-Laurent launched a Mondrian
process. Consider the following:
collection, and in 1966, a Pop Art collection.
To infuse an art culture in their organizations and
 International Contemporary Art Shows, such as
companies, luxury groups have created foundations
FIAC in Paris and BASEL in Basel and Miami, high-
and special collections. For example, in 1984,
light collaborations, such as when FIAC asked 18
Cartier created the Cartier Foundation for Contem-

yo
fashion designers to collaborate with 18 artists to
porary Art. In 2005, François Pinault, chief executive
provide its opening fashion show (1983).
officer and founder of Kering Group, established his
Foundation F Pinault for Modern and Contemporary
 Art galleries rent out their venues during fashion
Art in Venice. In 2014, LVMH will open its Fondation
weeks in New York, London, and Paris, among other
Louis Vuitton pour la Création, designed by Frank
cities.
Gehry. These classic forms of sponsorship are im-
portant investments whereby corporations encour-
 Auction houses are owned by luxury brands. For
age the arts while maintaining the independence of
op
example, Bernard Arnault (chief executive officer
artists.
of LVMH) bought the Tajan and Phillips auction
Today, collaboration with artists, mostly stars of
houses in 1999; François Pinault, founder of PPR/
the avant garde, has become even more intimate.
Kering (Gucci), bought Christie’s in 1998.
Luxury brands have initiated a collaborative stage
with artists–—who themselves are considered
 Museums have changed into luxury boutiques. The
brands–—into a de facto co-branding. Thus, as early
Guggenheim organized an Armani exhibition in
as 2004, T Murakami collaborated with Louis
tC

2000 called Exploration of Seminal Designer’s

Vuitton, and introduced his motifs on a limited
Vision, With More than 400 Objects, after receiving
series of leather bags. In 2008, Louis Vuitton asked
a gift of $15 million from Georgio Armani in 1999.
Steven Sprouse to tag a limited collection of bags.
Similar collaborations include Yoji Yamamoto for
 In a symmetrical action, boutiques transform into
Comme des Garcons, Robert Combas for Jean
museums. Their window panels are designed by
Charles de Castelbajac, and Keith Haring for
artists, and the construction of flagship stores has
Vivienne Westwood, to name a few.
been assigned to famous international architects,
No

These examples should not be taken as mere public

who make audacious, artful statements visible to
relations events designed by the brands to remain
all, similar to cathedrals and museums in the past.
attractive to the wealthiest consumers and counter-
balance the growth of clients. In a much deeper, more
 The flagship buildings themselves host artistic
significant change, this artification transforms nonart
exhibitions. Luxury brands also have developed
into art, to gain depth, elevation, and value and, in
temporary boutiques in unexpected places and
the meantime, project old brands into the future to
developed mobile museums to host and present
ensure their respect, if not iconic status, among the
artistic discussions of some of their iconic prod-
creative elite. This concept explains why many
ucts or logos, such as the Prada Transformer and
brands now compete to earn the collaboration of
Do

Chanel Mobile Art Container.

10. Involving artists at all levels of the
value chain
Artification is not a varnish. It is a strategic trans-
formation from the outside in, made possible by a
the most audacious artists.
In line with its discreet culture, Hermès has
preferred to create an ‘Artists’ Residence’ close
to the brand’s ateliers and workshops, to better
influence the artisans themselves and encourage
cross-fertilization as they work. Here, the hero is
not the artist; it remains the product.

This document is authorized for educator review use only by SOFIA ESQUEDA, IESA Venezuela until Apr 2020. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
 The artification of luxury: From artisans to artists
At a highest stage of collaboration, artists pro-
vide advice and input at all levels of value creation:
upstream at the conception of products, production
level, and know-how, and downstream in relation to
retail architecture, window panels, packaging,
merchandising, and communication. For luxury
brands, every act must be creative and refined to
create a sufficient gap. Artification means that
every act, including advertising, should be artful.
Some brands even take their inspiration directly
from art itself. Thus, the print ad of Secret Garden
from Dior was directly inspired by the famous
Edouard Manet painting, Le Déjeuner sur l’Herbe.
Yves Saint Laurent’s Manifesto fragrance launch
commercial used the body painting technique de-
veloped by Yves Klein. These artful references are
explicit and part of the transformation of luxury
yo
into art. Moreover, recently luxury brands have
begun to enlist famous directors of the seventh
art–—movies–—to make commercials (e.g., David
Lynch for Lady Dior, Martin Scorsese for Chanel
perfume Bleu 2).
11. The multiple media of artification
op
In addition to the media outlets mentioned previ-
ously, artification can be constructed through other
media. Retail is a place where art is to be experi-
enced. Luxury stores are not solely artistic architec-
tural statements; they also must be conceived of as
places for an artistic, four-dimensional experience,
tC
both within and outside the store. Today, Internet and
social media are of foremost importance. Although
the agreement of key opinion leaders must be ob-
tained first, luxury brands also need to gain the
respect of the general public. Luxury brands have
become the curator of content–—their own. Educat-
ing new generations today entails using social media
No
as a way to indoctrinate consumers into the brand
universe and culture. However, the process of artifi-
cation means much more than simply posting rich and
exclusive brand content on the many video websites
that attract these new consumers.
Events are also a key medium, though they must
be conceived as an artistic, cultural event rather
than a public relations exhibition. For Chanel fash-
ion shows under the direction of Karl Lagerfeld, the
challenge is–—with no expense spared–—to produce
Do
art at the highest level. This four-dimensional sen-
sory experience is not only enjoyed by the select few
invited but also gets immediately relayed on social
media platforms across the world. Finally, media
advertising is a necessary part of the artification
process because any luxury advertisement must be
conceived as if it was a piece of art.
This document is authorized for educator review use only by SOFIA ESQUEDA, IESA Venezuela until Apr 2020. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860
379
Books also can be part of it. Cartier provides
t
an unlimited budget for publishing its own books.
Even in the digital world, masterpieces seemingly
os
cannot be sold without an accompanying book,
whether about the object itself or the legend of
the brand, to commemorate the purchase experi-
ence. The quality of these books guarantees they
are not thrown away but remain as durable art
sources.
rP
12. Conclusion: An ambitious vision
for luxury?
This article examines the relationship of art and
luxury. Art has become a way to put luxury at
the forefront of contemporaneity, a remarkable
feat for brands that promote their past as well.
Luxury brands have been elevated as strong cul-
tural conveyors of advanced taste. By recruiting
rising or confirmed stars from the art world, firms
can nourish their brand with a flow of inspiration.
At a deeper level, they provide luxury with the
necessary transcendence this sector needs to
overcome the pitfalls created by irresistible
growth.
A question thus arises: Does this strategy ac-
tually position luxury as the paragon of human
work? It might be the unspoken goal, accessible
by exploiting three major weaknesses of contem-
porary art. First, it has abandoned work as a value
and focuses essentially on creating experiences for
receivers. Formerly, artists had to be excellent
artisans first, to master the technique and spend
time on each piece of art. If work is abandoned by
art, luxury brands could capitalize on this concept
and earn considerable additional social legitima-
tion. Second, contemporary art involves provoca-
tion, creating a split with elites, which offers
another entryway for luxury brands. Third, many
contemporary artists refuse to ennoble ingredients
and instead create their art using leftovers and
junk. Luxury brands thus could become singular
as the only form of human work that combines
creativity, art, patient craftsmanship, and high
nobility.
References
Amaldoss, W., & Jain, S. (2005). Pricing of conspicuous goods: A
competitive analysis of social effects. Journal of Marketing
Research, 42(1), 30—42.
Bain & Co. (2013). The luxury market 2012. Paris: Bain & Co.
Benjamin, W. (2010). The work of art in the age of mechanical
reproduction. New York: Prism Key Press.
 380 J.-N. Kapferer

Blum, D. E. (2003). Shocking: The art and fashion of Elsa Kapferer, J-N., & Bastien, V. (2012). The luxury strategy. London:

t
Schiapareli. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Kogan-Page.
Chaddah, R., & Husband, P. (2007). The cult of the luxury brand. Karpik, L., & Scott, N. (2010). Valuing the unique. Princeton, NJ:

London: Nicholas Brealey.
Clark, T. (2007). Starbucked. New York: Little, Brown and Co.
Hagtvedt, H., & Patrick, V. M. (2008). Art and the brand: The role
of visual art in enhancing brand extendibility. Journal of
Consumer Psychology, 18(3), 212—222.
Heinich, N., & Leduc Browne, P. (1997). The glory of Van Gogh.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kapferer, J-N. (2012). Abundant rarity: The key to luxury growth.
os
Princeton University Press.
Thomas, D. (2008). Deluxe: How luxury lost its luster. New York:
Thorndike Press.
Vaughn, H. (2012). Sleeping with the enemy: Coco Chanel’s secret
war. New York: Vintage Books.
Wang, H., & Wei, L. (2010). The Chinese dream: The rise
of the world’s largest middle class and what it means
to you. New York: Create Space Independent Publishing

rP
Business Horizons, 55(5), 453—462. Platform.

yo
op
tC
No
Do

This document is authorized for educator review use only by SOFIA ESQUEDA, IESA Venezuela until Apr 2020. Copying or posting is an infringement of copyright.
Permissions@hbsp.harvard.edu or 617.783.7860