Blog Week 2- Winnie Chen

Based on the readings of Week 2, France’s national aesthetic is its establishment of standards in existing industries, which has contributed to the development of past and contemporary industries. Regulations have been strictly placed on various mechanics and various practical arts, which has since held luxury as France’s aesthetically reputable status. France is successful in branding its national aesthetic because it appeals to most citizens of France. According to “Colbert and Governmental Control of Industry in Seventeenth Century France” by Abbott Payson Usher, “his [Colbert] policies express only his estimate of the possible achievement of the Frenchmen that he know, both bourgeois and nobles” (Usher 237). The desires and standards envisioned by King Louis XIV, and the policies implemented by the Minister of Finance Jean-Baptiste Colbert were not created to cater the upper, elitist groups of France. France’s national aesthetic is successful as it is because King Louis XIV applied his desires to the larger nation of France. Though only the middle class and noble class are mentioned in Usher’s claim, the success of France’s branding of its national aesthetic comes from implementing the aesthetic throughout its environment, lifestyle, and the streets of France. As mentioned in class, you don’t need a dime to experience the aesthetics of France; it is everywhere. Perhaps France could have achieved its maximum national aesthetics status if there was greater focus to spread aesthetics in areas of France where poverty and the lower class continue to populate.

            France’s establishment of standards has become its aesthetic because it has set a guideline to what and how things are produced, and why the global public should desire it. Under the three classes of expectations, a notion of quality that beats quantity has emerged, thus making it much more appealing to consumers (Usher 239). It is the idea that you want it, but you don’t need it; and when you have it, your level of luxury increases, such as that $600 Burberry scarf that my mother bought despite the cost. Given these circumstances, out of bitterness, perhaps a way to maximize the national aesthetics status is if the aesthetic would not easily sway groups not of the intended audience. I just find it ironic that my family needs to save money for college tuition, but it is okay to buy an extraordinarily expensive scarf. Truly irony is a measure of an elite (wealthy) society.

Question: Would replicating France’s method of creating a national aesthetic with revisions and improvements in currents times create the similar results? How would it be different?

Works Cited:

Usher, Abbott Payson. Colbert and Governmental Control of Industry in Seventeenth Century France. 11th ed. Vol. 16. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT, 1934. 237-240. Print.

Image: http://authentique-art.com/images/bg_eiffel.jpg