Fanta Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Mike91 said: Her singing Happy Birthday to JFK, while wearing this dress, is one of the most iconic moments in pop culture history. Are you people really this uninformed? Thinking rich people should be allowed to go around and ruin pieces of historical clothing to feed their narcissism is just... My comment was aimed at people saying this moment was one of the most iconic moments in “American history” not pop culture history… Not sure who the second paragraph is aimed at but I didn’t say that. Edited June 15, 2022 by Gypsy Guy
Joyride Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 it's both their fault, Kim's for not understanding and feeling entitled to wear such an important piece of art/modern pop history, and the people in charge for letting her wear it, like... what were THEY thinking
MadonnasBoyfriend Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, Mitsouko said: Seeing Liddos in here cosigning the "it's a piece of fabric" mess is hilarious to me because let Kim wear and permanently damage one of Gaga's supposedly iconic Halloween costumes and they'd be the first to try to cancel her She just wore its not like she spilled a glass on wine on it. People just like giving these girls sht Edited June 15, 2022 by MadonnasBoyfriend
Joyride Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 Just now, MadonnasBoyfriend said: She just wore its not like she spilled a glass or wine on it. People just like giving these girls **** I think the problem is that the dress should've been left alone to begin with. it IS an important piece of modern art/history and the people who own the dress and KIm had literally no business letting her use it, they knew it could potentially get damaged, so I'm one, unsure of why Kim is the only one to blame, and two, the people who were meant to take care of the dress were clearly going through something when they let her rent it. they were both absolutely wrong.
Dana Scully Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 1 hour ago, Mandalay said: Marilyn was voted sixth on AFI greatest actresses of all time list. She's spontaneous with her acting. Her dialogue delivery in non-blonde bombshell films was really ahead of it's time - not shouting, not melodramatic. She could sing beautifully, and perform beautifully. Has iconic numbers that everyone and your favorite emulate. The camera loves ha. Has many, many iconic pop culture moments without being a try-hard. Don't say stuff like Marilyn was the Kim Kardashian of her time. this. like we get it you don't like Marilyn but at least be a bit accurate smh
Arthoe Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 3 minutes ago, Joyride said: it's both their fault, Kim's for not understanding and feeling entitled to wear such an important piece of art/modern pop history, and the people in charge for letting her wear it, like... what were THEY thinking I agree. No conservator or curator of a museum would EVER agree to do this in their right mind and no insurance in their right mind would ever cover these costs. You can see from a mile a way that Kim K doesn't fit the gown, the damage was basically inevitable. Trying to get this covered is like going into an insurance company saying "I wanna have an insurance for the car that I'm planning to drive into a shopfront next week"
MadonnasBoyfriend Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 1 minute ago, Joyride said: I think the problem is that the dress should've been left alone to begin with. it IS an important piece of modern art/history and the people who own the dress and KIm had literally no business letting her use it, they knew it could potentially get damaged, so I'm one, unsure of why Kim is the only one to blame, and two, the people who were meant to take care of the dress were clearly going through something when they let her rent it. they were both absolutely wrong. Wrong or right doesn't matter. The dress was inappropriate in the first place. She was doing a sexy nude look for a married man she was having an affair with for the world to see while doing a happy birthday all sexyish ?. Not people acting like it deserves the massive amount of respect just to have a fresh opportunity to bash Kim
Joyride Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 3 minutes ago, Arthoe said: I agree. No conservator or curator of a museum would EVER agree to do this in their right mind and no insurance in their right mind would ever cover these costs. You can see from a mile a way that Kim K doesn't fit the gown, the damage was basically inevitable. Trying to get this covered is like going into an insurance company saying "I wanna have an insurance for the car that I'm planning to drive into a shopfront next week" this is LITERALLY it like I understand, it's Kim Kardashian, she is important to, she wanted to make a statement, she wanted the "look", but the conservators of the dress failed here, big time. like I mentioned before, they had no business letting her wear it. no matter how much money she paid for it, it could've been avoided and the dress is now ruined. that one is definitely for the history books.
Joyride Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 7 minutes ago, MadonnasBoyfriend said: Wrong or right doesn't matter. The dress was inappropriate in the first place. She was doing a sexy nude look for a married man she was having an affair with for the world to see while doing a happy birthday all sexyish ?. Not people acting like it deserves the massive amount of respect just to have a fresh opportunity to bash Kim no, no, no, darling, you can't use this against me because I haven't said one bad thing Kim. I'm just simply pointing out the fact that that letting her wear the dress was a huge mustake, from both the conservators and Kim herself. even if you like the dress or not, it is an iconic look. it is important to modern Pop culture/history. the conservators failed, and so did Kim. I'm not here "bashing her" nor do I plan to do so.
MadonnasBoyfriend Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Joyride said: no, no, no, darling, you can't use this against me because I haven't said one bad thing Kim. I'm just simply pointing out the fact that that letting her wear the dress was a huge mustake, from both the conservators and Kim herself. even if you like the dress or not, it is an iconic look. it is important to modern Pop culture/history. the conservators failed, and so did Kim. I'm not here "bashing her" nor do I plan to do so. Maybe not you but read the other comments even just in here. People just like to use these girls as a whipping board and would react differently if it was their fave or Kelly Clarkson wearing it Edited June 15, 2022 by MadonnasBoyfriend
CaptainMusic Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 They should’ve never let her wear it in the first place smh
Joyride Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 1 minute ago, MadonnasBoyfriend said: Maybe not you but read the other comments even just in here. People just like to use these girls as a whipping board and would react differently if it was their fave or Kelly Clarkson wearing it I'm only responsible for the things I write here, I do not wish or have the time to read other people's comments. sorry!
MadonnasBoyfriend Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 Just now, Joyride said: I'm only responsible for the things I write here, I do not wish or have the time to read other people's comments. sorry! This isn't about Joyride, baby. Joyride isn't the subject here.
Joyride Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 2 minutes ago, MadonnasBoyfriend said: This isn't about Joyride, baby. Joyride isn't the subject here.
Mandalay Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 And to think Marilyn didn't have close relatives that inherited her properties (some distant acquaintance - the second/third wife of her acting coach finally got hold of them I think), and that she was almost all alone, and helpless throughout her life saddens me as a fan when stuff like this happens. Her properties should be kept in a museum altogether, like Mariah once suggested.
Protocol Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 The fact that in 500 years the only evidence of Kim’s existence will be a footnote on a museum display of this dress saying that it was damaged by a socialite whose ass was too big for it
Oceania Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 12 hours ago, lostcause said: Mona Lisa is only so famous because she was stolen in 1911. It was not considered the masterpiece it is today before. Luckily the thief, Vincenzo Peruggia, had respect for the art he coveted and did not horribly damage the painting the way Kim did to a legendary and incredibly influential Jean Louis dress. The Mona Lisa is a vanity portrait commissioned by a rich nobleman, it’s basically the renaissance version of a wedding portrait or pregnancy announcement on Instagram. does that make the craft less valuable? Do you really think that this dress is less valuable or worthy of preserving because it is younger and it’s designer isn’t as famous as da Vinci yet? Imagine if 60 years after da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa, before his legend was what it is today and before anyone cared about the now iconic portrait, the people of Florence were as flippant and anachronistic as you today. Art isn’t more valuable simply because it is older. All of this is irrelevant. I stressed the fact that the dress is famous due to Marilyn wearing it once just to emphasize the absurdity of putting it on the same level as a widely known and distinctive painting from one of the greatest genius ever. Modern american pop culture < actual history. The notoriety of that dress is nothing more than a product of shallow celebrity worship, the other one's the result of talent and centuries of cultural heritage. It's the illogical comparison that triggered my original post.
Domination Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 Okay, not trying to play Devil’s advocate but let’s be level headed about this: 1) Kim only wore the dress while she was on the stairs. She had a private changing room at the bottom of the stairs where she put the dress on, walked up the steps in it, and then was made to change into a replica for the remainder of the night. 2) There were multiple conservationists involved in this project who were with Kim during the fittings and with her the night of. 3) They’re just a few missing beads. Who is to even say that they were the originals or that beads haven’t been replaced in the past? At the end of the day, the art of conservation of artifacts like these will always involve repairing and restoring from states of damage. It’s inevitable. I would guarantee this is not the first and will not be the last time this garment experiences minor damages because that’s the cost of keeping its legacy alive for generations to come.
MoonGoodandHappy Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 (edited) Her *** made another victim. RIP. Edited June 15, 2022 by MoonGoodandHappy
Enoch Posted June 15, 2022 Posted June 15, 2022 4 hours ago, Oceania said: actual history. you implying MM singing happy birthday to JFK was fictitious? Smells eurocentric in this post
Alldeezy Posted June 16, 2022 Posted June 16, 2022 I've seen this everywhere, why did they let Kim wear it in the first place?
Protocol Posted June 16, 2022 Posted June 16, 2022 9 hours ago, Oceania said: All of this is irrelevant. I stressed the fact that the dress is famous due to Marilyn wearing it once just to emphasize the absurdity of putting it on the same level as a widely known and distinctive painting from one of the greatest genius ever. Modern american pop culture < actual history. The notoriety of that dress is nothing more than a product of shallow celebrity worship, the other one's the result of talent and centuries of cultural heritage. It's the illogical comparison that triggered my original post. And shallow celebrity worship of figures like Marilyn, shallow as it may be, is the product of thousands of years of history and has its roots in religious worship and veneration of the reproductive goddess. That dress Marilyn wore, embodying her status as the ultimate female sex symbol of modern times, is part of a legacy of art that goes back to the birth of venus by botticelli, the venus de milo statue, all the way back to fertility idols from the paleolithic age. The female form has always been a source of fascination, fear, admiration, and worship and has been represented by human cultures in endless ways. The dress Marilyn wore is part of that tradition, in its own 20th century way. It's far more than just "shallow celebrity worship".
Oceania Posted June 16, 2022 Posted June 16, 2022 4 hours ago, Enoch said: you implying MM singing happy birthday to JFK was fictitious? Smells eurocentric in this post Fictitious? Eurocentric? I also mentioned the Pyramids. Does that make me afrocentric? Y'all sure do love to twist words.
Enoch Posted June 16, 2022 Posted June 16, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Oceania said: Fictitious? Eurocentric? I also mentioned the Pyramids. Does that make me afrocentric? Y'all sure do love to twist words. Everything is history. Funny you mentioned the pyramids, when their construction could also be boiled down to superstition and god/deity worship. Bet a lot of people here were worried when Notre Dame was burning but doesn't have the same energy when the Ancient City of Palmyra was being destroyed by ISIL Edited June 16, 2022 by Enoch
Recommended Posts