Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

Though extensive and seemingly exhaustive in its details and depth of research, almost half of the 600 pages is devoted to hammering it into our heads the fact that Coco Chanel was a fascist Nazi sympathizer. Garelick attempts to subtly separate Coco Chanel the fascist woman from Chanel the powerhouse fashion brand of today, so as not to offend the current owners nor damage their profits in any way. The author easily glosses over the fact that Coco had to gain the favor of the Nazis in order to rescue her nephew (or most likely son), who was dying in Nazi captivity and whom she loved dearly. The author quickly glosses over the fact that the Wertheimers royally screwed Coco by setting up their own, separate Chanel corporation in America during the war, and profited enormously from perfume sales, all the while sharing none of it with the woman herself. The first thing Garelick does is insinuate that the interlocking C logo is a fascist symbol much like the swastika, and how Coco's own fascist tendencies enabled her fashion brand to dominate. There are a good twenty pages or so where the author lectures the reader on fascism and the evils of the German Nazis. It is repetitive, completely unnecessary, and only serves Garelick's purpose in imprinting a very negative image of Coco in the readers' minds. Many of those who were wealthy or had much to lose during the war were Nazi sympathizers, including the British royal family and almost everyone in the upper echelons of European society, but the particularly harsh focus of the author on Coco, as well as Garelick's own personal insinuations (which she weaves in many paragraphs stealthily) on Coco’s thoughts or motives, are just plain annoying. The real motive of this biography is to shame, denigrate, and disparage Coco Chanel the woman, while simultaneously praising and building respect for the house of Chanel under the Wertheimer ownership. I do not recommend this book, and feel that it portrays a very strong woman who overcame incredible tragedies and obstacles in a purposefully negative light. It is not an unbiased, objective biography.