news


In search of the magic formula

Pусский
November 2008


Intro

The excellent Swiss essayist, Christophe Gallaz, recently re-examined the word glamour and recalled its original definition that signified ‘sophisticated charm’, characterizing notably ‘the world of entertainment and fashion’. Gallaz quickly went on to point out, however, that the ‘sophisticated charm’ of yesteryear has undergone considerable transformation. When, in an earlier time, the image of Humphrey Bogart would have unquestionably evoked the film Casablanca, the image of George Clooney today definitely brings to mind Nespresso. Good for NestlÉ, a company that has perfectly understood how to capture the glamorous aura of an actor to attribute this glamour to the brand. But, if we might suggest, this is also too bad for glamour itself, which thus loses a little of its substance.
Let’s take another example, Charlize Theron, one of glamour’s major ambassadors. While she is still in the midst of a lawsuit with her former mentor, Raymond Weil, for having ostensibly worn a Dior watch in public while under contract with the Swiss brand, Theron is nevertheless already lending her image to Breil. This example, reaching near absurd-ity, demonstrates that glamour can also blur the message and thus lead to confusion. In this regard, let’s look again at George Clooney—his nearly identical appearance in the advertising campaigns of Nespresso and Omega might lead some inexperienced consumers to think that the watch brand actually belongs to the food giant!
This evolution in the perception of glamour is the exact reflection of an era where the brand triumphs, becoming a little like the tree that hides the forest of products rather than the tree on which the products sprout forth. As George says in the advertisement: What else? What else than the brand?
By attracting the spotlight to itself, the brand thus tries to capture the essence of glamour, and to make its logo a symbol of magical powers. As we mentioned in a previous article (Glamour, grammar and sorcery in Europa Star No. 05/2007), glamour is closely tied to the indescribable, to the magical. Its linguistic origin is directly linked to the ‘curse or spell’ cast by a sorcerer, to the charm (which in the beginning literally meant ‘magic formula’) that carries you away, that bewitches you.
When Dior introduced its Poison perfume a few years ago, or even before that when Yves Saint-Laurent came out with its Opium potion, didn’t these examples represent a type of homage to the magical powers of the most bewitching scents? Weren’t they a sort of spell—or glamour—cast on consumers?
In search of this magic formula, brands are using their ambassadors as a way to create an aura of glamour around the companies themselves. But glamour cannot be explained so easily. It is derived from an almost chemical distillation of a person’s face, voice, and way of moving.
There are also various degrees of glamour. When the charm is ac-companied by contemplation or a certain consciousness, then we go beyond the simple role of a cardboard woman or man. We acquire a commanding presence—a sort of magical power - a true glamour.

Source: Europa Star October-November 2008 Magazine Issue