What does it mean to betray the format of a bag?

Picking up from where I left off last time, leaving it as a question,

I have continued to think about it further.

First of all, what even is a bag?

With my habit of asking 'why,'
I decided to look up the definition properly as stated by the Consumer Affairs Agency.

And then,

It seems that [kaban] and [bag]

are different.

I thought it was just the difference between Japanese and English, but apparently that's not the case.

Items that prioritize function are 'kaban'.
Items that have diversified to match fashion are 'bags'.

I see, what I have been making is
definitely a bag.
Until now,
I have said 'I am not a kaban maker,'
but I will correct that to
'I am not a bag maker.'
I'm glad I looked it up.
Even with things I thought were obvious,
there are still discoveries to be made.

And based on this definition,
when I look back,
I notice how many people seek a [kaban] in a [bag].

• A bag is a 'container'
• It should go with any outfit
• It should be usable in both rain and shine
• It should be light
• It should hold a lot
• Shoulder carry is good
• Crossbody is good
• Backpack style is good
• Ease of use is justice
• Lots of pockets is good
• A zipper is good
• Horizontal orientation is good
• A bright inner lining is good
• Price is determined by category
　　　(e.g., It's a tote, so it should be under X yen)

These are things I am told very often.
To summarize,
perhaps
it means wanting the 'best of both worlds' between a kaban and a bag.

It is a fact that casual bags have become established,
and the reality is that the parts where functions and prices should naturally differ have become muddled.

Setting that aside for a moment,
then next,
what does it mean to betray?

Even just saying 'betray' can mean many things.
There are negative meanings,
but there is also an angle of
'betraying in a good way.'

I thought about what bag betrayal means to me.

① Betrayal of function
Betraying the fundamental premise of existence
of holding things.

For example,
• It holds nothing
• Just to hold, but lovely
• Just to set down, but lovely
and so on.
But considering the definitions of [bag] and [kaban] from earlier,
this might be the betrayal that best expresses where a bag differs from a kaban.
However,
it requires a shift in perception from 'something to put things in' to 'something that exists.'
Furthermore,
one must also consider the part about existence as a bag + existence as art,
etc.
It seems like a high hurdle to clear.

② Betrayal of price
For example,
selling at a price that significantly exceeds the average market price for a tote bag.
A betrayal that breaks the world's common sense or unconscious assumptions.
But this isn't just about a simple price hike; it's about value.
A betrayal that overturns market concepts
with a price that matches the value.

③ Betrayal of material
For example, in the case of HOLOHOLO BIYORI,
overturning the preconception that hemp sack = rough.
Starting from the premise that a hemp sack is something beautiful.
A betrayal of surprise.


④ Betrayal of categoryA betrayal that blurs the lines
of tote, shoulder, and handbag.
A shape that makes you pause for a moment and ask, 'What is this?'


⑤ Betrayal at first sightNot 'Oh, it's a hemp sack,'
not 'What material is this?',
but the moment it becomes 'Wait, is this a hemp sack?'

Truly, a betrayal in a good way.
__

By thinking about various forms of 'betrayal,' I realized that
they all eventually lead back to part 1.
And the boldest and most impactful way to betray
is still,

perhaps.

Next time,
[A bag that has ceased to exist as a container]

Huh?

My time for thinking still hasn't stopped.