Currently Viewing: Scatter My Ashes at Bergdorf’s

I do love a good fashion movie.  Unfortunately, Scatter My Ashes at Bergdorf’s is not about fashion.  It is about money – lots of money.

Bergdorf Goodman is a department store.  They just celebrated 112 years in business, so there is a lot of retail history connected to the store.  They are considered to be one of the top, if not the top store in New York.  It seems that one of the main objectives of this film was to convince the viewer that Bergdorf Goodman is not only Number One, but that there are no close competitors.   And a big reason this is so is because the clientele is so special.  That’s because their clientele has money.

There was a steady stream of celebrities (Nicole Richie? Joan Rivers? Susan Lucci? Why?) and fashion people who essentially said the same thing –  that if you do not have your clothes in or if you do not shop at Bergdorf Goodman, then your life is not worth  living.  Okay, I exaggerated that a bit, but after hearing nothing but heaps of praise for the store and how it had changed so many lives, it made a trip to Saks Fifth Avenue sound like slumming.

I guess my expectations were just too high.  I thought there would be a lot about the history of the store and about how they became the best shopping experience in New York.  Instead, the skimpy history was woven through the film by the use of a timeline with tiny print.  And key elements of the story were omitted.   Not a single word was uttered about Bergdorf Goodman’s famous made-to-order salon and workrooms.

There were also inaccuracies.  From the time the store was built in the 1920s until the 1980s, the Goodman family lived in an apartment on the top floor of the building.   In the film one interviewee stated that the Goodmans were listed as the building’s janitors because building codes did not allow just anyone to live above the store.  What the film did not say was that is because the workrooms were classified as a factory, and that was why occupation was not permitted.  People were living above their stores all over the city.

But as tedious as it was at times, I can’t say it was all bad.  Quite a bit of it showed how the holiday windows at the store are developed and executed.  They began with the idea of the 2011 Christmas windows, the Carnival of the Animals, and how the design and the props were made and acquired.  Then we were treated to the installation of the five windows that fit the theme.  I can tell you, there is a lot of time and energy put into those wonderful windows.

But back to my original point, that the film is about money.  They talked about how much things cost.  They talked about how much money the best sales persons make.  They talked about John and Yoko saving Christmas one year by buying $400,000 worth of furs.

I realize that it is pretty difficult to talk about a store without talking about commerce, but the idea put forward over and over that the store is exclusive and aspirational combined with  stress being put on the cost of the merchandise makes one think that perhaps the filmmakers agree with  F. Scott Fitzgerald when he wrote that the very rich really are different from you and me.

Considering that there were over 100 persons interviewed for the film, it seems a bit odd that so many of them were saying pretty much the same thing about the store.  It gave a scripted feel to the work.  Maybe this can be better understood when you know that one of the backers of the film was Andrew Goodman’s grandson, Andrew Malloy.  The Goodman family no longer owns the store, but they do own the building.

And the lack of history can partly be attributed to the lack of an archive.  I read in an interview with the filmmaker that the only archive of the 112 year old business was a group of photographs.   In showing the apartment the film had to use photos that were used in a  1965 magazine article.

Since it is not the holiday season, the Bergdorf Goodman windows were pretty simple.  I loved this modern art angle.  Can you tell that is an Alexander Calder type mobile?  The Thom Browne dress on the left is just as much a piece of modern art.  This was the dress I was so taken with in Saks, and I can tell you that no photo that I can take would ever do it justice.  The folds of the skirt are carefully placed and are attached to an underdress, giving a floating look to the folds.  And you cannot really see the beautiful insets on the bodice that supplied the shape, but this was one special frock.  But, it is not exclusive, as Saks had the same dress on display on the sales floor where shoppers could see it in the round and study the structure. Click the photos to get a better view.


Filed under Currently Viewing

14 responses to “Currently Viewing: Scatter My Ashes at Bergdorf’s

  1. Thank you for the thoughtful review. I just watched the trailer and wanted to gag at the focus on money and celebrity and status. It’s sad that the film is less of a documentary and more of a commercial (or at maybe infomercial).


  2. sam common

    I just want to say it is always thought provoking to read your reviews. I admire that you do not mince words, and can be tough sometimes (rare qualities in Fashion blogs).
    As to:” Can you tell that is an Alexander Calder type mobile?”. I can tell that whoever designed the so called sculpture failed miserably, or perhaps that was the intent?
    Anyway, Happy Labor Day. Thank god for America’s textile workers over the years, I send a salute to you and them.


  3. The title of the film promises so much, such a pity it couldn’t deliver. I enjoyed reading your review. The Thom Browne dress is beautiful.


    • I became slightly obsessed with that dress, but I was not its only admirer. A young woman from France and I stood in front of it, trying to explain to her fellow why the dress was so special. I hope she had the money to take home a very special American souvenir!


  4. Pingback: Harrods with a French Accent: Vogue 1986 | Catwalk Threads Vintage

  5. Interesting, Lizzie. I just saw the film, too, mainly to learn more about the eighty year old personal shopper, Betty Halbreich. Even though I once lived in New York for two years and visit the city about once a year, I have never been inside. And the film certainly made me feel like I don’t belong there.


  6. sewassbe

    And this is why we keep institutional archives! That makes me sad that they have saved nothing… I’m also sad that the film sounds like it turned out to be one big advertisement for the store. Sadly, that seems to be what fashion is about nowadays – only the superrich can afford well-constructed durable goods out of nice materials. The middle-class and upper-middle-class have to be satisfied with cheap “trends” that they throw away after a year or two. 😦


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.