Saturday, February 5, 2011


Somebody posted an old article about the son of that controversial army money man presently setting fire to the headlines.  The material was written back in 2009 but reading it almost two years later did not diminish the repulsion and disgust one experiences in just plowing through the paragraphs.

The article was meant to describe the plight of poor little Tim Garcia who was on bail for one million US Dollars, on house arrest and feeling completely miserable as he was surrounded by the orange boxes from Hermes, complaining about the ankle detector he had to wear because ---- sigh --- he could not wear his Sergio Rossi boots. 

I can only imagine the degree of pain, the level of anguish that a dedicated fashionista like him underwent considering it was New York Fashion Week and he had to live with an irritating curfew.  Besides, being monitored by the US Government just because your Dad was so scandalously accused of plundering the money that belonged to the armed forces of a nation can be --- uh, somewhat embarrassing.  I mean, this is not the sort of thing you talk about with Marc Jacobs especially if you are head of a branch of his Public Relations.  

Even if he is under the payroll of one of America's leading fashion houses, lest we forget that Tim Garcia lived at the Trump Towers. And that address, my dear, was never, is not and will never be abode of the hoi polloi. And considering the cost of residences in that building, one wonders how the family of a military man from the Third World can possibly afford such abodes. Well, to ask such a stupid question requires a certain degree of irony.

But let us not even go there.

After all the vehement reactions to a two year old article, Tim Garcia's status in Manila will never be the same--- with or without his Sergio Rossi boots. Until there is a definite outcome to the plea bargain agreement his Dad has wrestled with the Sandiganbayan, poor Tim will become the object of contempt and ridicule. True, sins of the parents should not be thrown against their children. But Tim seemed to have enjoyed every privilege, every benefit ... and definitely every credit card that was brought about because of the supposed resourcefulness of his dear Papa.  

Upon combing through the article, there was not a single moment of retribution, not a millisecond of shame or even a glimpse of indignation for what has transpired in his young perfumed life ---- living and working in the Big Apple and gaining access to the corridors of glamor only imagined or fantasized by little 'klitas back home in the sticks. 

Instead what was absorbed was this dismissive air, this c'est la vie attitude that made Tim look like he was quite certain that this will all come to pass and that he will soon be in the fitting room trying out the latest suits from Jil Sander or rubbing elbows with the Seventh Avenue crowd, discussing the significance of the return of minimalism in the latest collections. 

For someone with important concerns such as what is the latest It Bag( is it the end of the Mulberry Alexa or shall we go back to the reconstructed Hermes Kelly?) or if pink is the new black ... who cares about all the petty politicking in the Third World? That is just too parochial and has got nothing to do with the an even more infuriating controversy like ... uh, why did Michelle Obama wear Alexander MacQueen?!

Of course some people won't just get it, right?

But what is even more appalling is the degree of materialism by which and from which kids seem to find their purpose in life.

Granted that indeed he works for a major label and that he must live/breathe/photosynthesize fashion, the fact still remains that this is one example of a life that is affirmed, gratified if not completely justified by the acquisition of branded materials. He couldn't help it. He would rather die than wear any piece of rag bought from Bangkok.

We cannot blame Tim (or his father as well) for that.  As ironic as it sounds, Tim is as much a victim of a kind of mindset that has encouraged if not fostered this disgusting sense of flippancy and vacuity. In a planet made so small by technology and rotating on its axis thanks to the wheels of commerce, consumerism has become such a major part of life that it has practically become second nature to the human species.

Not that there is anything wrong with such wishes, ambitions or preoccupations.  If some believe that purchasing a Birkin bag equivalent to the price of a SMDC one-bedroom condominium, then that is her prerogative --- if she has the resources to obtain such a sweet object of desire. If someone feels that spending half a million pesos for a Vera Wang wedding gown will raise the chances of a successful marriage, well, why not?  

Just as long as you have the money. And as long as the money you use to buy your Hermes, LV's and Mulberrys are not sneaked out from the coffers of government or meant to buy combat boots for soldiers fighting rebels in the southern islands. Anyone can buy a tiara, nail it on her head and walk down Serendra --- for all we care --- as long as it is money honestly obtained, earned or inherited. Whatever.

As for Tim, well ... we shall await the fate of his father. 

In the meantime, almost two years after this controversial article was written and resurrected in the internet, he must be braving the snowstorms that have hit the U.S. He must be desperately trying to be happy in his Marc Jacobs coat, wobbling and hobbling in his Jimmy Choo boots and sobbing on boxes of tissues since his face has been splattered all over Facebook and Twitter while Daddy is being grilled by the senators.

What a sad life for Tim. A sad fashionable New York life. And a newfound popularity in the internet.

No comments:

Post a Comment