Before The Superfake: A Problem Older Than Social Media

Could you really buy a Hermès dupe in 1929?

You’ve probably seen the comments.
“Why would anyone pay that much when the superfakes are this good?”
“Just buy the replica. No one can tell the difference anyway.”

The conversation around counterfeit Hermès has become so common, it feels almost baked into the luxury experience (unfortunately). We tend to think of fake luxury as a modern problem.
The Superfakes. The side-by-side unboxings. The secret DMs about resale sites. TikToks with 10,000 comments dissecting stitching, fonts, and blind stamps. Counterfeits feel like a product of the Internet or, mass access, and the algorithm that delivers temptation right to you.

But what if I told you that Hermès was being copied in public, in print, and by name as early as 1929?

While browsing newspaper archives with my sister, Becca, at goodman.lafon, we found something actually shocking: a department store ad for a handbag that references Hermès outright. The store offered a reproduction of a “Ring Envelope Bag”, framed in the same kind of admiration you might hear in a YouTube review today.

The price? $4.95.
The message? You don’t have to be in Paris to look like you just came from there.

Welcome to Before the Superfake. A new mini series where we take a look at vintage fashion ads that prove today’s luxury conversations aren’t new at all. Each installment will focus on one article and unpack what it tells us about the cultural story of imitation. How did these “fakes” function before we called them that? Who were they for? What do they reveal about us? And why buy the real thing?

In today’s post: the 1929 Hermès lookalike.