Kim Kardashian's decision to wear Marilyn Monroe's iconic "Happy Birthday, Mr. President" gown to the #MetGala has conservators, curators and fashion historians baffled and worried that the incident sets a dangerous precedent.
— Los Angeles Times (@latimes) May 4, 2022
Here's why. https://t.co/kVIjfJZqI0
From the L.A. Times article:
“I’m frustrated because it sets back what is considered professional treatment for historic costume,” says Sarah Scaturro, chief conservator at the Cleveland Museum of Art and formerly a conservator at the Met’s Costume Institute. “In the ’80s, a bunch of costume professionals came together to state a resolution that historic costume should not be worn. So my worry is that colleagues in historic costume collections are now going to be pressured by important people to let them wear garments.”
Cara Varnell, a longtime independent art conservator specializing in historic dress, put it this way: “We just don’t wear archived historic pieces...."
It's so specifically historical — connecting 2 gigantic icons on a specific occasion. It's "the most expensive dress ever sold at auction... made of a delicate fabric called souffle... stretchy and resilient when it’s new, but becomes weaker and more brittle with age." And it's covered with "thousands of hand-sewn beads." So the potential for damage is immense.
You can see why Kardashian wanted to associate herself with such grandeur, but it's such a failure. The dress looks dumb on her, because her skin is a different color from the dress, so the illusion of nakedness — so mind-blowing on Marilyn in the spotlight on a dark stage — is entirely lost.
Who owns the dress and had the power to lend it to KK? You might think the Metropolitan Museum would own it. Well, they wouldn't lend it, I presume. It belongs to the Ripley’s Believe It or Not in Orlando (which paid $5 million for it)
Was the gown altered to fit KK (who is 4 inches shorter than Marilyn was)? Supposedly not. I guess KK wore tall shoes. KK also has a very different body shape. She claims to have dropped 16 pounds to squeeze into the thing and even then couldn't entirely close the zipper (note the fur jacket). She only wore the real dress for a few minutes on the red carpet, then changed to a replica dress for the rest of the evening. If there was a replica, why not only wear the replica?
I guess the controversy is part of the press KK desired. That kind of attention is not the slightest bit sexy. But publicity is publicity. It's fungible, like money... for some people.
Posts
65 comments:
Hunger Games
Misogyny? MISOGYNY!
As a huge MM fan, I'm slightly pissed that someone wore her historical gown. I can understand why KK did it, and I appreciate that she was careful with the garment.
The best (?) part is that KK looked unremarkable. If I weren't told it was MM's I wouldn't know. The shapewear, the tendency toward nude styling -- all the current trends make this dress commonplace. It goes to show that fashion is more than the clothes. Only MM could make this piece iconic.
The Ripleys believe it or not company also gave her a lock of Marilyns hair. Must be nice to be famous for a sex tape. https://news.yahoo.com/ripleys-believe-not-gifted-kim-164625298.html
"That kind of attention is not the slightest bit sexy."
For attention w*&!s, nothing is sexier.
…and God created Kargashian…
She also couldn't zip it up, so she had to cover that up with the fur. Big fake butts will do that.
Such costumery is reserved for Birthing Persons. Nobody gives a hoot about some tuxedo Cary Grant wore in 1962.
Marilyn would puke.
Isn't Kim rich? And a democrat?
Aren't Rich Democrats allowed to do WHATEVER they want?
"She's very sparkly. Definitely very sparkly."
The horses are not the hypocrites here.
Neo Marilyn Monroe: wears a body stocking as well a wrap in case her borrowed dress splits in a strategic location; botox-babe face ; 307 million followers; and they make sure they don't catch up.
Why hide art? She and the dress look fine. I sure don't see the danger posed here. Is it because she's not wearing a mask? AOC didn't wear a mask last year. Or does the LA Times just want to date KK?
In the ’80s, a bunch of costume professionals came together to state a resolution that historic costume should not be worn.
As this was laid forth by "experts," so it shall be now and forever...
Fussy.
Wouldn't want to remind people that JFK was a sexual predator.
Kim is not worthy of carrying Marilyn's jockstrap; much less wearing that dress.
Costume professional? How do you get that gig? What's it pay?
I'm not sure what you meant by that dress "connecting two gigantic icons".
But I can imagine.
KK agreed to numerous conditions before being allowed to borrow the dress from Ripley's but all I could think about was the fact that KK was wearing such high, spiky heels---doesn't that pose a serious risk to catching on the dress? Also, wouldn't she have had to try on the original on at least one prior occasion in order to get the info needed to alter her body for the exact fit?
Kim Khardashian, adviser to President Donald J Trump, wears the dress that got JFK whacked. It's not a coincidence, people. Awake yourself up to what's really happening.
KK is to MM as Pete Davidson is to Arthur Miller.
OK, we get the prog position on KK.
Maybe she can improve her status by singing Happy Birthday to FJB--God forbid. But Joe probably wouldn't enjoy it; he likes 'm younger.
By the way, what's the current prog take on MM? #MeToo victim? Model for female-bodied women? What?
".....and wear it's carcass as a skin suit, while demanding respect!!"
--David Burge, IowaHawkBlog.
Kim and Trump did get a woman who was sentenced to life in prison for a first-time drug offense out of jail, so there is that. Maybe that could have been a good thing.
I don't know about Pete Davidson, though. Kim may be on a downward swing, which is something I didn't think was possible given how she started out.
There's been some talk about whether having people still living in historic houses open to the public is a good thing or a bad thing. Maybe if the rent on the rare dress that is rented out once every few decades is greater than the cost of any wear and tear and contributes to the upkeep of the collection it could be worth it.
Did they sew a circus tent onto the back to contain her huge ass?
That entire family is incredibly unattractive, physically and otherwise.
I don't get it...
Aren't clothes for wearing?
When originally saw photo in gala report had no idea. Not the way I remember it. Can't believe it was a loaner. Did owner hope it would increase value of dress and drive tourists to museum?
For same reason don't think they should let Elizabeth back into Buckingham Palace. She might spill something on it.
In the ’80s, a bunch of costume professionals came together to state a resolution that historic costume should not be worn. So my worry is that colleagues in historic costume collections are now going to be pressured by important people to let them wear garments.
Wow, talk about your Iran Iraq War analogues.
1: "bunch of costume professionals came together". So what? Who elected you God? Do you personally own the item? no? Then you need to STFU
2: "now going to be pressured by important people"? In what way will those people be "important"? Because they're publicity hounds?
Both sides here suck
I feel the same way about the dress as I do about the guitars in the Rock n Roll hall of fame.
It's a dam shame they're under glass. Objects convey their power through use, not by being preserved.
Wear the dress, mark it up, reuse it. Play the guitars. That's alive!
Anything under glass is dead.
Howard said...
Kim Khardashian, adviser to President Donald J Trump, wears the dress that got JFK whacked. It's not a coincidence, people. Awake yourself up to what's really happening.
Actually, it's the other way round. Marilyn had only three months to live when she wore that dress.
Take your meds, Howard.
The material of the dress is fragile? What about the Presidential DNA? This dress could very well represent our last chance to reconstruct JFK! It should be preserved in amber.
It's really become the Met Holla - which proves wealth has been spread.
The whole big overblown production of John Kennedy's birthday was overblown then and apparently is still overblown, just like the entire myth of "Camelot."
Well, Camelot is a silly place. And JFK was NOT all that. He was not The One 1.0 (BHO being 2.0).
An insignificant dress worn during the singing of an insignificant song at an insignificant event is not HISTORY that needs preservation. It is not the relic of a saint.
It has as much importance as the time I saw Dorothy's ruby slippers or Archie Bunker's chair at the Smithsonian. Utterly trivial.
So bereft of appeal and notoriety, she has to borrow a truly 'famous' dead person's clothes to get some attention. Plumbing the very depths of glamour.
A BubbleButtEctomy was performed???
“ Wear the dress, mark it up, reuse it. Play the guitars. That's alive! Anything under glass is dead”
Let’s make a collage out of the Constitution.
“Let’s make a collage out of the Constitution.”
We did.
What's the problem with celebrities playing dress-up?
I didn't remember that MM had such a cheezy hairstyle
The Met Gala is the most annoying event of the year, followed closely by the WHCA dinner. Funny they were both the same weekend this year.
I question the idea that that dress is so historically important that it shouldn't be worn.
One actress wearing a dress to a party that another actress wore to a party. Nothing of historical significance happened related to the dress.
(Is Kardashian an actress? I don't know what she does. Some kind of celebrity in any case.)
I'm willing to bet Big Bucks that the hideous harpies screaming in front of the Supreme Court hate the Kardashians and other Glitterati with a passion.
"How DARE THEY strut their sexy goodies in front of the world!!
Don't they know they are inciting toxic masculinity?
--- And making us frumps look bad"
Kind of wondering why an actress' dress famous for a tarty performance is property of a tax supported museum instead of a Madame Tussaud's type exhibit or a private collection. I suppose in our baby boomeresq navel gazing culture, pop culture is the only significant thing.
No that I see the dress was property of Ripley's I take it back.
Dangerous, in what way? The dress is a sexy, yet elegant presentation and complement to her presence. Lovely lady.
Smilin’ smack down!
Seems to represent a significant amount of deep brokenness hiding behind a facade of glamour and power. Profound lies, betrayal, depression, pain, dehumanizing, oppressing, abuse.
It's an incredibly sad moment, really, when light shines into all the nooks and closets of everyone involved.
How many lives were broken coming out of that? How many people justified their own brokenness and abuse because those with power and glamour put it on public display?
Let's make sure to save the microphone at the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard trial, and not let anyone use that again, for posterity. I think the society of sound engineers are going to make sure that happens.
She could not get the zipper closed?
My recollection is that the dress had no zipper but a seamstress (seamster?) sewed the dress closed on her.
My recollection is apparently correct:
Nor does the photo show that Monroe reportedly had to be sewn into the dress because of how tight it was. She also chose to wear nothing underneath it, according to Vintage News, so that the fit would be flawless
https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/lifestyle-buzz/the-story-behind-marilyn-monroe-s-happy-birthday-dress/ar-AAWTnAa
So where did the zipper come from in the current version? Was it added for Kardashian?
And what about all the money spent on this Met Gala? Yes, I know it was a fundraiser but all those folks could have stayed home and sent a check both for the donation they made as well as the cost of clothes, travel etc. Kardashian could have probably sent an extra $30m had she just stayed home.
John LGKTQ Henry
Dave,
If Monroe had a jockstrap, it was from someone else.
She was known for going commando and was notably commando in the dress. And looking at the video, seemingly drunk.
Kardashian looks like she has a jockstrap or something under the dress.
Michael K - Howard - the easy banter between them marked their camaraderie...
About the dress - how dare she? who gave kk permission? Revolting.
Vulgarians 🤑
"Whole Nine Yards delivery service -- Kim speaking, how may I help you?"
Wow! We know Cultural Appropriation when we see it. That is unfair of a modern popular porn actress to steal Norma Jean’s chic.
I'm skeptical that KK was wearing the real MM dress. I'm not the only one.
https://pjmedia.com/culture/megan-fox/2022/05/04/there-is-no-way-they-squeezed-kim-kardashians-junk-in-the-trunk-into-marilyn-monroes-dress-n1595309
It's not the Shroud of Turin. (It would have been so cool if Davidson had turned out by her side wearing the Shroud of Turin).... I would think that this gives added value to the dress. Kim might turn out to be the iconic figure of her era. A lot depends on the circumstances of her death. She has to be relatively youthful, and it has to be unexpected. Very hard to top Marilyn's death, but the Kardashians have shown themselves to be innovative and imaginative when it comes to publicity.
In the Hard Rock Cafe in Tokyo, a glass case holds a shirt famously worn by Meatloaf at a concert. My companion's comment: "Imagine the smell." Pretty dress, though.
I wonder if the dress from the movie differs from the dress worn for the birthday song to Mr President.
Such costumery is reserved for Birthing Persons. Nobody gives a hoot about some tuxedo Cary Grant wore in 1962.
Try googling Cary Grant's blue suit from North By Northwest and you'll find that's REALLY not true.
I had read about $3,000,000 price tag ??? was that just for loan of it? or replica/original?
Michael K said...
Howard said...
Kim Khardashian, adviser to President Donald J Trump, wears the dress that got JFK whacked. It's not a coincidence, people. Awake yourself up to what's really happening.
Actually, it's the other way round. Marilyn had only three months to live when she wore that dress.
Take your meds, Howard.
===============
if Epstein did not kill himself did he kill Marilyn Monroe?!
"I question the idea that that dress is so historically important that it shouldn't be worn."
Well, let's examine that. Is it historically important because she was fucking the President at the time? Or despite that fact?
Lena Horne had a Tax Court case about the cost of her performance wardrobe. The IRS claimed the clothes could be used for ordinary wear so were not deductible. Ms Horne proved she had to be sewn into them and cut out of them and her deduction was ruled as acceptable.
I see a girl, a dress, a girl in a dress, with sexy and elegant appeal. I forward the motion for more appropriation, please.
It's funny how these celebrity tarts all seem to end up with Pete Davidson just before you never hear of them again. It's like he's the bottom rung on the ladder of their downward slide.
Post a Comment