logo
Why a handbag just sold for over $10 million

Why a handbag just sold for over $10 million

Perth Now2 days ago
The very first of the famed Hermès Birkin handbags, owned by the late actor Jane Birkin, sold for $10.1 million on Thursday.
Following the sale, Sotheby's described it on social media as the most valuable handbag ever to be sold at auction. The black, leather bag was the product of a chance meeting on an airplane in 1984 and has since become a symbol of wealth and elevated social status.
WATCH THE VIDEO ABOVE: Original Birkin handbag sells for $US10 million at auction.
Birkin was a British-born actor with a successful career in French films, starring in world cinema classics like La Piscine and Blow-Up. The legend goes that she was using a straw basket as a purse while on a flight from Paris to London, catching the attention of her in-flight neighbor.
That fellow passenger was Jean-Louis Dumas, then-chief executive of the Hermès fashion house.
According to Hermès, Birkin told Dumas 'that she couldn't find a bag suitable for her needs as a young mother'.
'A born creator with a keen eye, he immediately sketched a supple and spacious rectangular holdall with a burnished flap and saddle stitching,' the brand said.
Author Marisa Meltzer, who wrote a book about Birkin, said in a video for Sotheby's that the bag took on a life of its own. She noted that the bag was difficult to obtain after Birkin was seen out with it, and it remained an item of scarcity.
'I would say that the Birkin was an accidental icon,' Meltzer said.
A Birkin bag generally sells for between $20,000 and $30,000, but the price can go up dramatically on the secondary market. The price depends on various factors such as color, material and whether it was a limited-edition design.
Buying a Birkin bag is a complicated process as well. The bags are not sold on the internet and require a shopper to enter an Hermès boutique, where the selection is limited and a sales associate has the right to deny someone the opportunity to buy if there's a waiting list.
That scarcity is why many consider a Birkin bag to be the mark of elite social and financial status.
And though she provided the inspiration for the bag, Birkin rarely carried one later in her life. She told the BBC in 2017 that she found the bag to be 'too heavy'.
'Now I fill my pockets like a man, because then you don't actually have to carry anything,' Birkin said.
Birkin received bags as a gift from the fashion house over the years and actually sold some of the handbags to raise money for causes that were important to her. She sold the original Birkin at an auction for a French AIDS charity in 1994.
'Jane famously adorned it with stickers supporting Médecins du Monde and UNICEF, transforming the luxury handbag into a powerful symbol of her humanitarian efforts,' Sotheby's said on its website.
She told The Believer magazine that she had the good fortune of being able to afford designer clothing, but never thought much of it.
'I never considered myself as a fashion icon and, in our days, nobody was. No one had contracts with fashion houses. We just wore exactly what we wanted,' she said.
The former actor, singer and fashion icon suffered a stroke in 2021 and died in 2023 at the age of 76.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Britain's strategic priorities have changed. Australia must take note
Britain's strategic priorities have changed. Australia must take note

Sydney Morning Herald

timean hour ago

  • Sydney Morning Herald

Britain's strategic priorities have changed. Australia must take note

Last Monday, the British government formally launched its new National Security Strategy. Publication of the much-anticipated document came on the heels of the NATO summit a fortnight earlier, at which Britain, along with all other NATO members (except Spain) pledged to lift their defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP by 2034. Given domestic pressures on the budget in Britain and other NATO countries, that is probably unachievable. Nevertheless, there is now bipartisan agreement in the UK on an urgent need to significantly elevate defence spending over the coming decade. The National Security Strategy is premised on that expectation. With Anthony Albanese visiting China this week, and as we await the outcome of the Colby review of AUKUS, Australian eyes are rightly focused on Beijing and Washington. Why should strategic decisions made in London matter to Australia? The United Kingdom has long been, second only to the United States, our most important strategic partner: through the Five Eyes security network, the Five Power Defence arrangements, and now through AUKUS itself. This has also been our most longstanding military and intelligence relationship and – at a time of American unpredictability – our most reliable one. A significant reorientation of the foreign policy of such an important ally – particularly when it involves a change of its approach to our region – matters a great deal. The launch of the National Security Strategy coincided with the first anniversary of the election of Sir Keir Starmer's Labour government. Starmer's landslide victory, after a campaign in which he made himself the smallest possible target, was overwhelmingly driven by public contempt for what had become a comically dysfunctional Conservative government. Starmer's one-word slogan 'Change' captured the public mood but, in its very vacuousness, also demonstrated how anaemic Labour's offering was. The only message: 'We're not them.' Domestically, Starmer has had a miserable first year. The economy is in an even worse condition than it was when he was elected; capital is fleeing in the face of punitive taxes; the number of illegal arrivals across the English Channel has exploded to 44,000 on Labour's watch. As his government marked its first anniversary, a backbench revolt forced it to abandon reforms to the welfare system, leading to a £5 billion fiscal hole which will undoubtedly be filled with yet higher taxes, accelerating the capital flight. It all has a very retro, 1970s feel. The abysmal state of the nation is, naturally, reflected in opinion polls: Labour's support has collapsed to 23.9 per cent, nearly five points behind Nigel Farage's insurgent Reform Party. While the Tories remain a joke, Labour is already being seen as a failed experiment. Yet amidst the domestic gloom, foreign policy has, to the surprise of many, emerged as Starmer's strong suit. What has stood out, in particular, has been his deft handling of Donald Trump – a feat that has eluded most world leaders. On Friday, it was announced that Trump will visit Scotland next month, where he will combine the opening of a new golf course with a bilateral meeting with Starmer. Then, later in the year, he will be flattered by the panoply of a full State visit, at the invitation of King Charles. Two visits in six months (plus an early and successful visit by Starmer to the White House) is pretty effective diplomacy. Some prime ministers can't even get a meeting.

Britain's strategic priorities have changed. Australia must take note
Britain's strategic priorities have changed. Australia must take note

The Age

timean hour ago

  • The Age

Britain's strategic priorities have changed. Australia must take note

Last Monday, the British government formally launched its new National Security Strategy. Publication of the much-anticipated document came on the heels of the NATO summit a fortnight earlier, at which Britain, along with all other NATO members (except Spain) pledged to lift their defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP by 2034. Given domestic pressures on the budget in Britain and other NATO countries, that is probably unachievable. Nevertheless, there is now bipartisan agreement in the UK on an urgent need to significantly elevate defence spending over the coming decade. The National Security Strategy is premised on that expectation. With Anthony Albanese visiting China this week, and as we await the outcome of the Colby review of AUKUS, Australian eyes are rightly focused on Beijing and Washington. Why should strategic decisions made in London matter to Australia? The United Kingdom has long been, second only to the United States, our most important strategic partner: through the Five Eyes security network, the Five Power Defence arrangements, and now through AUKUS itself. This has also been our most longstanding military and intelligence relationship and – at a time of American unpredictability – our most reliable one. A significant reorientation of the foreign policy of such an important ally – particularly when it involves a change of its approach to our region – matters a great deal. The launch of the National Security Strategy coincided with the first anniversary of the election of Sir Keir Starmer's Labour government. Starmer's landslide victory, after a campaign in which he made himself the smallest possible target, was overwhelmingly driven by public contempt for what had become a comically dysfunctional Conservative government. Starmer's one-word slogan 'Change' captured the public mood but, in its very vacuousness, also demonstrated how anaemic Labour's offering was. The only message: 'We're not them.' Domestically, Starmer has had a miserable first year. The economy is in an even worse condition than it was when he was elected; capital is fleeing in the face of punitive taxes; the number of illegal arrivals across the English Channel has exploded to 44,000 on Labour's watch. As his government marked its first anniversary, a backbench revolt forced it to abandon reforms to the welfare system, leading to a £5 billion fiscal hole which will undoubtedly be filled with yet higher taxes, accelerating the capital flight. It all has a very retro, 1970s feel. The abysmal state of the nation is, naturally, reflected in opinion polls: Labour's support has collapsed to 23.9 per cent, nearly five points behind Nigel Farage's insurgent Reform Party. While the Tories remain a joke, Labour is already being seen as a failed experiment. Yet amidst the domestic gloom, foreign policy has, to the surprise of many, emerged as Starmer's strong suit. What has stood out, in particular, has been his deft handling of Donald Trump – a feat that has eluded most world leaders. On Friday, it was announced that Trump will visit Scotland next month, where he will combine the opening of a new golf course with a bilateral meeting with Starmer. Then, later in the year, he will be flattered by the panoply of a full State visit, at the invitation of King Charles. Two visits in six months (plus an early and successful visit by Starmer to the White House) is pretty effective diplomacy. Some prime ministers can't even get a meeting.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store