^原來 (美術). 風格四論:生活美學與形象競爭力 生活美學與形象競爭力. 新銳文創. 1 October 2012: 4. ISBN 978-986-5915-12-4（中文（臺灣））. 奢華（luxury），在《新世紀經典美語大辭典》第四版的定義為：１．非必要但能帶來愉悅及舒適的事物；２．昂貴或不易獲得的事物；3.奢侈的生活或周遭環境。在拉丁語luxuria的原意是「過剩」或「生活中額外之物」，這不是人類的基本的生理需求，這是「衣食足」之後的消費行為。
^Michel Delon. Luxury. Encyclopedia of the Enlightenment. Routledge: 783–786. 4 December 2013. ISBN 978-1-135-95998-2（英语）. Luxury has been part and parcel of the baroque state, being embedded in the logic of societies centered on monarchical courts that generated economies based on eccentric spending. In the 18th century, however, luxury was subject to a different logic, as it developed alongside the slow shift in centers of wealth from the courts toward the cities, and simultaneously stimulated and expressed a rise in consumption and the spread of a new relationship of consumers to objects.
^Tatsuya Sakamoto; Hideo Tanaka. The Rise of Political Economy in the Scottish Enlightenment. Routledge. 27 June 2005: 154. ISBN 978-1-134-43551-7（英语）. On luxury we can see two strands of opinion among thinkers of the Scottish Enlightenment. One view was that luxury could contribute to economic development, which means luxury as effective demand. For example, Mandeville justified it in this way; Hume distinguished bad luxury from innocent luxury and supported the latter for the prosperity of national industries; and Steuart encouraged luxury among citizens in the nascent stages of foreign trade and inland trade, though excluding luxury which decreases the vitality of people and their productive power. Here the innocent luxury, different from the bad effects of luxury such as indolence, sensuality, corruption, prostitution and perdition, was accepted favourably, since it was a representative phenomenon of a polished and civilized society, and also an indication of the quantity of effective demand.
^Barton Carl Beebe; Madhavi Sunder. The Luxury Economy and Intellectual Property Critical Reflections. Oxford University Press, Incorporated. 1 September 2015: 33. ISBN 978-0-19-933570-1（英语）. Called the "Velben effect" after the American economist and sociologist Thorstein Veblen, this nonfunctional and status-signalling effect of luxury trademarks has been generally explained by recalling people's desire to signal wealth and social status "by conspicuous consumption," that is, by showing the possession of material wealth through products indicating superior social standing, such as the luxury products identified by these marks.
_2015_December.jpg)
.jpg)
