In the 21st century, we have tremendous direct access to information and media that covers territory both deep and wide. For instance, when I was an architecture student, the term Russian Constructivism was barely popping its head up in journals like Oppositions or Skyline, and you could sometimes find a book on the subject in the back of a used bookstore.

We share Shepard Fairey’s love of the Constructivist design language, and are awed by his deft handling of this easy-to-blow compositional style. But let’s take a step back from its compositional excellence and graphic power and talk about its cultural significance.

The visual language Fairey is paying homage to was that of Russian artist Aleksander Mikhailovich Rodchenko. The group of artists that Rodchenko was associated with, the Suprematists and later the Constructivists, sought to create a radically new art for the Russian Revolution.

OK, this was not about raising your fist up high for better stitching on Prada bags. Russia was in the midst of tremendous social upheaval, war and starvation. The mechanisms of state and culture had to be re-invented to help save everyone from chaos and disillusion. The Constructivists set out to educate miserably poor, war-torn, illiterate peasants about socialism and the Russian Revolution…so they would feel more comfortable about sacrificing all their worldly possessions and moving to a Siberian hog farm.

As an interesting aside, the visual language of the Constructivists is a great example of a “media” look and feel growing out of the technology and funds available. With an audience that could not read, the Constructivists’ media of choice was graphic posters. Also, certain inexpensive inks and papers were chosen for their costs. Rest assured that the Soviet department stores of Rodchenko’s post-revolutionary Russia looked nothing like Saks Fifth Avenue. The “I Want” of Rodchenko’s time would’ve been something like: I want a half a bowl of half-frozen Kasha and two left-footed army boots so I can make it through the winter without starving or getting frostbite.

Don’t get me wrong – I love the work – but when I saw it, I had severe “irony pains.” The narrative is somehow askew…there’s this lady shaking her fist demanding the goods Saks Fifth Avenue offers…and she looks proletarian (if you will) and pissed off… or may just be cold-hearted. There is a sign that says “Arm Yourself,” which is softened by a cutesy: “With a Slouchy Bag.”

So, what’s the message here? Something in the narrative is amiss. By the way, I also wonder about the socio-political sensitivity since a large number of luxury shoppers last year came from abroad looking for bargains. Does your brand benefit from a narrative calling for a vigilant armed response to the lack of cashmere in our lives?

I mean there are great parallels between our time period and the early part of the 20th century and I’m fine with co-opting the language and drastically altering the meaning, but the end result is dripping with irony in the face of a deepening recession and decline in luxury retail sales.