that's why I have decided to sew my own wardrobe. I can choose where and who makes the fabric. Ethically made labels are expensive and I cant afford it unfortunately, but I can support those who handweave on a loom loom from small villages and cities then I will
I would like to add to the comments recommending the video that Abby Cox put out about this dress and the reasons why museums may not have been able to purchase the dress even though they very likely would have if it had been possible. She does a fantastic breakdown of all of the points brought up here in this video as well, the social issues, the dress history, and down to in depth knowledge about the damage to the dress itself. I feel like possibly many people have not understood the trouble that clothing and costume historians and departments of museums have in accessing pieces. Justine pointed out the exact problem here too which is that people don't count it as an artform and something that should be value. As such museums get little to no funding for those departments and are struggling constantly to change the public's perception, interest, and value in this topic.
It’s strange, because I find costume exhibits more interesting than paintings and sculpture. Clothes tell one so much about history and life from a time period.
What's interesting is nobody says that Kim Kardashian is fat yet many people falsely believe Marilyn Monroe was plus size. Even after a starvation diet Kim couldn't fit into that dress.
Wow, Justine. You did a terrific job of researching this topic and giving a fair and dispassionate assessment of the controversy. Great job! Personally, I don’t understand why she chose to wear the dress in the first place. She should have known it wouldn’t fit per proportions, no matter how much weight she lost. It also doesn’t flatter her skin tone. I think it’s always better to wear something that suits you rather than squeeze into something just because you think it’s pretty.
She had to wear the real one for the attention. Wearing a more flattering copy would have been completely forgettable and for a manufactured celebrity's lifestyle, attention is oxygen.
@@myladycasagrande863 Like I get the need for attention but the dress didn't suit her nor fit her (dieting this way is kinda ...concerning). And if she was changing literally four minutes later, she could've had a more flattering version for herself, since the original was made with intention to look like nude dress. 🤷♀
Kardash just proved one more time, what everybody has already known: she is just a vulgar rich woman, who has to "borrow" somebody's glory in order to shine in this reflected light. Marilyn was a great actress with a very tragic life & death. She was real, and so was her passion and her pain. And Kardash is just a simple moneybag, which cares only about profit.
From the perspective of fashion historians, the sins committed were many and egregious - and they could have serious ramifications for the Met's Costume Institute, in support of which the Met Gala is held each year. Can the Institute maintain its integrity as a museum dedicated to the conservation and research into historical dress when, it appears, it depends for its funding on donations from elites who may then turn around and borrow historically-significant garments to wear, in direct violation of its mission. Worse yet is that Kim was enabled in this by the Met Gala board itself (headed by Anna Wintour), furnished with a room in which she could change into the replica. While there has been a long association between modern fashion media and the Met Gala (Diana Vreeland had headed the Board before Wintour), there seems to be a growing conflict in motive between the organizers of the Gala and the Institute that the event is intended to benefit. It does not help that Wintour has paid an inordinate degree of attention to the Kardashian-Jenner clan, perhaps beyond what would be appropriate for the editor-in-chief of the world's most famous fashion magazine.
Hi Justine, Fabric is art and so is the designs of how to wear it! I frequent thrift stores to find amazing fabrics to repurpose. Not all Americans follow the Kardashians, tell the world!!! You look so content and happy, and I am happy for you that you have found your home at last. 🌸
I prefer thrift as well for many reasons The fabric has likely been washed, which means I know how it will wear. It is less expensive if you gain or lose weight or need temporary clothing, which also reduces the demand for fast fashion. Things cost less so then I don’t feel compelled to hold on to them forever if someone else can use them. You can find some really luxe and nicely tailored items, like Brooks Brothers pants, several higher end dresses (including a Halston from Bergdorf Goodman), and cashmere sweaters.
Very interesting points. What I found shocking about K wearing that dress has nothing to do with fashion. If, for example, she had worn Marilyn's iconic white "steam grate" dress I would not have given it a second thought. It was the juxtaposition of this dress and the Madison Square event with the political historical context of that time that really makes this more than about fashion, or actually not about fashion at all. M's affairs with the Kennedy brothers, the FBI scrutiny of that, the rumors of a dove-tailing of Hollywood, politics, and organized crime, the changing nature of what was taboo to the press, the over- the- top sexuality of the dress basically confirming the affairs, not to mention Jackie being in the audience, the beginnings of a sexual revolution in the US, all added up to a very unique turning point in US politics which was occurring at that time. Kim K may be a somethimg of a cultural phenomenon now but her influence doesnt come close to how this dress symbolized a critical historical time. It's like K tried to piggyback that for more exposure and just miserably failed. In a hundred years, that event at Madison Square Garden will still be historically and politically significant while the Kardashians will be a footnote along with 80s aerobic knee socks and plastic 70s dresses.
While I personally don't care much about the dress specifically, a lot of people do. If someone bought a cherished painting by Rembrandt (or someone of equivalent historical significance) and stabbed it all over with a knife, in our current system it's completely legal for them to do so, but that doesn't make it okay. Legal and moral are different concepts. Some things are part of our shared human history. More and more people are angry about the wealth inequality inherent in capitalism and seeing how the super-rich can buy widely-cherished unique historical items for themselves and trash them understandably emphasizes the immense unearned power and privilege of the ruling class. They're doing the same thing to the Earth, a thing that surely should belong to all of us.
I don't know how you can compare a woman who is famous for simply being famous and Marilyn, a critically-acclaimed actress whose beauty will go down in history. Kim? Not so much.
This is such a great analysis on the Marilyn vs Kim dress controversy. I initially thought it was a wild idea for Marilyn's dress to be loaned to Kim, however, you've brought up a lot of great points and counterarguments that I think the collective society should think about. I think the biggest takeaway (that you touched on) is we should regard fashion as a true art form, if we want to keep iconic pieces from pop culture sacred. Also, we should feel the same away about the fashion we consume (*cough* fast fashion *cough*). All in all, a great video as always, Justine!
@@luzdeld we can use that argument on everything historical so. A painting of Leonardo Da Vinci got destroyed "oh, its just a painting", the church of Nothre Dame caught con fire "it was an old church anyways"... Idk about that... I think we should care about historical artifacts as well as how fast fashion is having an impact on earth. History is important to share how was life in diferent eras. We need to preserve the few things that hold value to be able to learn from our predesesors. Edit: typo. Oops.
Justine ma cherie, the simple fact that more than one person didn't believe Kim was wearing the actual Marilyn dress reveals how unreasonable the whole idea is. I personally think it's pure selfishness, there is absolutely no excuse for Kim to feel entitled to wear that dress (change her name to karen kardashian lol). But then again, how to expect something different from that family?
Thank you for the concise breakdown on the dress itself. I have very mixed feelings especially due to this being an historical garment and the overall fragility of a museum-worthy piece being worn decades later. I almost wish Kim had had a dress made specifically for her (by perhaps a new designer/different dress), just as Marilyn did.
I think it is because that is a relic that shouldn't be on nobody's hands and second, because so many people dislike the Kardashians because of their lack in taste and common sense while having so much money.
I like this neutral viewpoint! For Americans Marilyn Monroe is our Coco Chanel. This scandal has actually made the public aware that many American Pop Icon's Wardrobe pieces are historical museum worthy. That funding should be raised so belongings, especially fashion clothing should be purchased and preserved. Ripley's is a "sideshow" circus carnival museum, not a historical museum. So again it created awareness that many historical museums do not have the funding to purchase famous fashion pieces and it ends up being bought by private collectors. I'm curious to hear what would be the opinion if a French controversial influencer wore Coco Chanel's personal little black dress to a celebrity event that didn't fit her. Would it be a scandal? Would there be a similar reaction? Do private collectors own a lot of Coco's wardrobe or is it in historical museums? Thank you for the interesting video! 😊
Thank you Justine, you are just a practical, knowledgeable person and I do enjoy watching the videos you make because I know I will benefit something out it.
+Justineleconte *The dress in question was **_originally_** crafted for Marlene Dietrich; modding it for Norma Jean Monroe was a straightforward task.* Kim Kardashian has a WAY larger hip circumference than _both_ Dietrich and Monroe, should really have had a Swarowski dress crafted around her curves.
Very well done video, Justine. I don't know why people were so outraged about the dress. Marilyn wore it while cooing Happy Birthday to President Kennedy, with Mrs. Kennedy sitting next to him. She had affairs with both Bobby and and Jack Kennedy. I don't understand why people think it was part of our American history. That moment was not important, and the dress is a symbol of our increasingly decadent pop culture. I am no fan of the Kardashians, but I don't care if Kim wore the dress, because there are so many more things for people to care about. And good for Kim for making a charitable donation.
I just don’t think that the “Marilyn” dress looked very good on Ms Kardashian. A replica dress in a matching skin tone would have far more flattering. But of course, the controversy was the whole point, wasn’t it? No different from in the 1960s, really. When Miss Monroe wore the dress to sing “Happy Birthday” to JFK, she was telling the whole world that he was having an affair with her. That was pretty tacky, too. I can just imagine how his wife Jacqueline must have felt about being publicly humiliated. Monroe’s stunt seems down right unkind when you look at it through Mrs Kennedy’s eyes.
Regardless of who owns or what type of establishment it resides in, we care. We care because she holds an iconic and wonderful place in our hearts. We want it displayed and be enjoyed and to be taken care of. Yes I am pissed that she wore it.
Thanks for commenting 🤗 You're Comments and reviews are appreciated Make a note to My trade analyst and Administrator, Mr Daniel we have something real big to introduce you to, A life changing Investment program 💬
I love the part: ..."Well implants do not shrink..." EPIC. Well said!. In any case, If this "voluptuous" (not to say otherwise) person wore the dress even if open at the back, the sole fact of forcing those humongous hips to fit in, must have had ruined certainly the fabric... ohhh but what is the problem if money can buy everything....
thank you for your intelligent in depth analysis, which makes a lot of sense, of course, rationally. It does not make me feel better about somehow ruining something precious, a memory...I am nostalgic, romantic, in love with vintage retrò style, old movies and the like, and beyond all the cold facts, press/money/etc aspects, it just pained me because Marilyn is special to me while the other woman I consider a symbol of so much that is simply trash in our modern culture, including of course "the way they function" and the fact that money can buy and destroy anything... bisous...looking forward to your nest house updates!
I don’t understand why people got “genuinely angry” or if it was in fact genuine at all. You touched on several great points. Thank you for breaking it all down.
Pattison Group toured the dress in W Canada a few years ago to promote new groc stores opening. Dress was in bullet proof display case with security also. Terrific commentary Justine.
Excellently broken down argument. Good fashion is art, whether high end or high street and museums need to be serious about collecting and preserving pieces. Years ago I went to a Valentino exhibition, it was stunning.I remember seeing icon dresses like Jackie Onassis wedding dress (2nd wedding). I also saw a Mary Quant exhibition with icon styles but some of the materials hzd started to decay because moths had managed to attack the fabric.
Thank you for the most informative video I have watched this year! Not because you talked about the dress, but because you researched and presented facts logically! I respect that alot
It's a Helmut Lang dress, in thick fabrics, that's why it can almost "stand". I like that it is all-black and yet includes different fabrics and textures: plain weave, satin weave, velvet surface finishing.
Thanks for commenting 🤗 You're Comments and reviews are appreciated Make a note to My trade analyst and Administrator, Mr Daniel we have something real big to introduce you to, A life changing Investment program 💬
I have so much to say about this but I will make it brief. I am furious that KK would EVEN THINK to wear this historical dress at 60 years of age. There is evidence she has ruined this very, very delicate fabric that they don’t even make anymore. Stones are missing. Ripleys Believe It Or Not bought it for 4.8 million in 2016. RBON as you know is not an accredited museum (and there are 33 of them in the States here) but kind of a cheap exhibition show. Orlando was chosen bc of the mecca of attractions there. I am so sick and tired of ALL the Kardashians. What poor role models to say the least for women especially younger women. There this didn’t turn out so brief!
Thank you for saying that all of us should be concerned about where our own clothes come from! AMEN! I think we all win when we lift each other up. Love and good vibes to all 〰〰
Chapeau! Justine, this video is a masterclass. i worked for almost 30 years in advertising and this is what you do, you calculate the risk... huuuge winner Ripley, believe it or not ;)
The only thing that I find interesting about this is the public reaction. I wonder if someone less polarizing than Kim wore the dress if anyone would have cared. I feel like people were only upset because it was her. Did most people even know this dress still existed before this? Probably not. And you're right, the owner of the dress can do whatever they want with it. Kim said in an interview that the theme was American fashion, and what's more iconic than this dress. It's not that deep people.
It makes me want to just make my own that matches my shape and skin tone (but with a zipper). I foresee people from seeing communities making their own skin toned matching ones for Halloween this year
It depends under which conditions the dress was lend. Better to wear original for the red carpet and a copy for the party. Were people expecting her not even sit on a chair the whole evening? The complaints from the dress owners to the media were kind of lame...
I don't know - but it would make more sense for American museums to want to buy it. Or private collectors who want to loan the piece to a museum later.
Thanks for commenting 🤗 You're Comments and reviews are appreciated Make a note to My trade analyst and Administrator, Mr Daniel we have something real big to introduce you to, A life changing Investment program 💬
Amazingly thoughtful video - thank you for the information on the dress. Personally, I understand Ripley can do whatever he wants with the dress... but, it was what I consider a trashy move. There are things in our history that are iconic and it just looks disrespectful to those icons to wear their clothing. I guess we can look forward to her wearing Dorothy's clothes. It's just disrespectful to our memories of a much loved historic figure. But, trashy is the Kardashian trade.
Well that Dress mite start to travel to all the different Ripley’s across the US. Mite get lucky and it comes to the one that’s 30 minutes away from me. I would go see it. Also Ripley’s has some really odd and interesting stuff. Like paintings on spiders web.
Kardashian thought she could steal Marilyn Monroe style and glamour, but she doesn't have it. Good luck to Kardashian that in dressing that fatal dress, she didn't got the bad "juju" rubbed in her and go the same way as the original owner. It was after that "scandalous" dress that everything went wrong for Marilyn.
Hi Justine, good video. When you made your point about fashion being considered a lower level art (if any sadly sometimes) came to my mind your video about a trip to London and thought if you have visited Victoria&Albert Museum (vam.ac.uk)- for art, design and performance - which has organised many many times fashion exhibitions (2 at the moment) and the fashion museum on the Southbank. There are museums that give fashion it's value as art and in my opinion as an invaluable tool to interpret history. Take care, love your channel.
You brought up a lot of points I hadn’t even considered! Very thought provoking video. Personally, I didn’t have any moral outrage about the dress being lent out, I was just irritated with Kim for wearing the dress and damaging it. I’ve never been a fan of hers, I don’t really think her style is all that interesting, and I saw her choosing to wear Marilyn’s dress as a cheap move for the press, which as you aptly said, is “how the Kardashians operate”.
Kardash just proved one more time, what everybody has already known: she is just a vulgar rich woman, who has to "borrow" somebody's glory in order to shine in this reflected light. Marilyn was a great actress with a very tragic life & death. She was real, and so was her passion and her pain. And Kardash is just a simple moneybag, which cares only about profit.
She's like most people at the 'top', their self absorbed borderline 'narcissists'. That's why they are where they are, because they always want more and nothing they currently have is good enough. I think that's why people kick off about small things like this dress. It's not the dress, it's the excessiveness and self centered ego we can't stand. Especially in a time where excessiveness is causing so much destruction.
This is the most intelligent, thorough, thoughtful and balanced coverage of this dress that I have seen. It really helped me understand the whole phenomenon. So many good points, and all well explained. Thanks, Justine!
You should watch Abby Cox video for an in-depth discussion of why this is a problem and why it shouldn’t have happened. Extremely intelligent and thought out statements made by someone with the credentials to back it up. Clothing and textile history is her whole entire career.
@@Chaotic_Pixie I watched that one but seeing this video with the explanation of it being a copy I'm not sure it's such an issue as it was made out to be.
Le verità sono due. La prima è che il vestito di Marylin è caduto in mani sbagliate. La seconda è che alla kardashan stava malissimo. Brutto ma brutto assai..
@@Nelly-J Justine just explained that it’s NOT a copy. It was the original and didn’t actually fit her. The back had to be left open. That’s why she has the white stole covering her back side.
@@Chaotic_Pixie Read my statement above! This happens more often than you think. I have a friend who worked for the Royal Opera House in London and Paris Opera. Both theaters have huge costume collections dating back several hundred years. For special events, these costumes are taken out, worn and even danced in. It's a huge honor to wear the same robes as Beverly Sills and Luciano Pavarotti!
"Marilyn is perfect because she's gone, and every passing decade makes her even more perfect in the collective memory." YES. The dress was a publicity stunt, and now it's a publicity stunt again.
@@jeanlaubenthal698 Sadly she wasn't. She was a very intelligent woman who admitted in her journal that she hated that men didn't take her seriously and only regarded her as an ornament. She was what the world wanted her to be and it broke her.
It isnt about being perfect. We simply adore her AND the place in history she holds. Sure some things may be more important. This doesn't negate the fact that I don't want someone else in 2022 wearing it and certainly not being carless with it. Maybe not everyone thinks of it this deeply. I didn't know MM after all but she has a part in and a place in women's history. Its the Juxtaposition of KK for me. One women's struggle, achievement, art Aside someone with less esteem.
Thank you Justine for the history of the dress. You are right about, we need to be VERY CONCERNED about where WE OURSELVES are getting our clothes made. 😔
That was a great point that shut it all down 😆. No one can point fingers cuz most of us have 3 pointing back! And also her other zinger was pointing out how Marylin gets more perfect as the decades go on. It reminds me of a quote "mean people never die". You can substitute any unsavory word. But point is we make people out to be so angelic and perfect once they pass. Marylin was prob just as scandalous as Kim lol. No need to be so emotionally distraught them two were kinda cut from the same cloth 🤣🤣(pun absolutely intended) 💁.
Sartorial necromancy. Very creepy and almost trying to steal her limelight. MM was degraded in her own time and now can't even have the one dress designed exactly for her. It's shameful another woman did this to her. Copycats should still be respectful and she had a replica ready to go. Should've made it match her own skin for same effect, as homage, not rip-off.
I was shocked that Kim… who had a different body type and skin tone… wanted to wear the original, because it didn’t fit… and she didn’t wear it as well (without undies) like Marilyn did. She also had a better fitting copy made, that she wore for the rest of the gala. Why not just wear that, for the red carpet too… and just mention it being “like Marilyn’s”? Probably because she wanted the “media drama” and perhaps the “I am important enough that I can get whatever I want.” 🤷🏻♀️
Of course she wanted the drama, and she got what she wanted. Same with Marilyn . She wore that dress purely to show off her hoeing around tendencies. (I mean Marilyn)
Thank you for explaining. Unfortunately Kim Kardashian has a massive ego and thinks she can do what ever she likes, because of her money and celebrity status. It should never have been worn by anyone. Is someone now, going to want to wear her Some like it Hot dress. I hope not.
If this ain’t one of the most perfectly executed videos of 2022, I do not know what is. 0 nonsense, 0 clickbait, just hard facts. Keep it up, sister. ❤️🔥
What the World gained with Kim wearing Merilyns dress? Nothing! So basically a part of history is destroyed in order to gain nothing. This is completely disrespectful toward Merilyns heritage. She had been used in her life, but even 60 years later. Very sad!
Here is one of the outraged conservators. I disagree here. The dress was damaged, no doubt about that. The gloves were ridiculous and actually damaging themselves, there only to suggest ‘care’ that was clearly not there. Besides a curator is not the professional figure to assist in a situation like this. The state of that dress was altered and interfered with forever. This may not necessarily be a negative fact in all instances, but in this case what was it for? A caprice? I really don’t think what can be seen as a smart economic move is a good move per se.
"I wish people cared that much about where their own clothes come from." Yes! Stellar point and so well said. Not a fan of any of the K fam at all and still don't think she should have worn it but your video massively puts it all into perspective. Well done. Merci.
That's what I am seeing to - but I do follow mostly people knowledgeable in historical costume and fashion - people are not against the actions of just Kim or just Ripley's, but the whole situation where something like this can even happen so easily for clout and profit
I don't think it's hypocritical for museums to be upset that an artifact was damaged just because they didn't purchase it. There could be a lot of reasons for that other than that they didn't want it or that they don't value fashion as high art.
@@corimi7341 this. We have photographic evidence of the dress being stretched out with some stones missing. We have so many textile conservationists talking about how the dress would have been damaged even if someone smaller than Marylin wore it because of body oils, movement, and UV exposure. The cotton gloves were a terrible choice because they catch on the material. Conservationists say the dress should have only been handled with nitrile gloves. “I wish people cared this much about where their own clothes came from.” Justine makes the mistake of thinking people can’t do both, and because this was her focus, she didn’t bother doing more research.
Many (probably most) museums have a "scope of interest" when collecting and preserving. A textile museum won't collect an Apple computer. A glass museum glass won't be interested in collecting baseballs. The museum of the American Revolution isn't going to be in the business of collecting JFK political memorabilia or 19th century Chinese export pottery. That doesn't mean that they don't care or "should have bought it" if they cared. This is a reminder that private collectors are have no obligation to actually care for the items in their collections. That said, I'm not sure a museum would ever be interested in hiring whatever "experts" went along with this stunt.
Abby Cox did a video on this as well, from her perspective as a dress historian, and she explains really well why Kim Kardashian wearing this dress - even if it's just for four minutes - is a really big deal for dress and pop culture history. Most dress history departments in museums also don't have big budgets at all (people tend not to know how little money most museums have at their disposal, except the big ones of course), and the Met doesn't provide funding for their's at all. That's the whole reason why the Met Gala is even a thing in the first place. To secure funding. Unfortunately, only Ripley had the funds to buy this dress.
This is really important information. Justine talked as if people who care about history didn't care about buying it when they had the opportunity forgetting that not all museums have the same money as the Louvre.
@@nanda483 when you do research, there's always more things to uncover and more angles to be explored. It's likely that in preparation for the video Justine didn't have enough time to look into which museums could realistically afford to buy the dress. Alternatively, the info on museums' budgets might not be publicly available, hence impossible to compare.
Hi Justine, thank you for the video, well-researched as always. While you bring interesting and valid points to support the decision of KK and Ripley, the debate around wearing the dress is one of morals and ethics. Are you implying that because Kim paid/made a donation and Ripley got promotion this makes it ok? So what if a few years ago more conservative museums didn't buy the dress? Does that nullify their concern for what is now a museum artefact? Maybe they realized they made a mistake, made they didn't, but they can still express their professional opinion on the issue and we shouldn't be so quick to dismiss it because they didn't pay years ago. Is this where we're headed? Pay up and we'll listen? I wholeheartedly agree with you that we should be concerned with the sourcing of our clothing, but what's that got to do with a pop/social/ethics debate? Using the same logic, but pushing it further, there are people in the world suffering of hunger - isn't frivolous to be concerned with fashion? Why aren't we more outraged about that instead of clothing sourcing? People were upset by the entitlement brought on by millions of dollars which allows certain people to eschew social norms and conventions, i.e., rules don't apply to me. That's what stands at the core of the debate. Add to that, the potential destruction of the dress itself. Your video seems to say that's ok, and let's think clothes' sourcing. While we're on that, if we want to be completely honest, most people can't afford to always buy ethically sourced clothing, so whether we want it or not, fast fashion is going to be the main provider. From what I ve noticed, some fast fashion brands are trying to be more careful to the environment and to human rights. That aside, it's not fair to deviate attention from what is an important social/ethical debate, even with a dress at the middle of if, to guilt tripping individuals about their buying choices. Both are important issues, and they can definitely co-exist. Anyway, I always watch your content with pleasure, it wasn't the case with this one, but I'm still a fan. My comment is not meant to bring any vitriol or throw any shade and I hope it might sparks a reconsideration of the issue at hand. Always a subscriber and a virtual friend, G.
If you owned a Monet, you get to do what you want with it. Ripley's owned it. They let her wear it. There's nothing morally wrong in either of those decisions. Also, if an actress was sleeping with a married US president and his brother and then publicly sang happy birthday in a nude see-through dress nowadays, I think the same people who call Marilyn an icon would call that woman.... insulting things.
Question: Who wore it better? My opinion is MARILYN wore it better! Kim shouldn't have horned in on another's fame, she should get her own iconic dress if she wants one.
EXCELLENT points Justine!!! Scientifically, it is impossible that the dress was not damaged JUST in her putting it on whether or not the damage is visible!! I absolutely cannot agree that KK is comparable to MM as a cultural icon, however, no!!! It is this illusion that KK is so obviously trying to cultivate by wearing the dress!
“I wish people cared that much about where their own clothes come from.” Talk about an icon! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
This is when I clapped. I love Justine.
@@calmbeforethestorm9498 serious mic drop, she’s incredible!
Yes!
An absolute MIC DROP moment.
that's why I have decided to sew my own wardrobe. I can choose where and who makes the fabric. Ethically made labels are expensive and I cant afford it unfortunately, but I can support those who handweave on a loom loom from small villages and cities then I will
I would like to add to the comments recommending the video that Abby Cox put out about this dress and the reasons why museums may not have been able to purchase the dress even though they very likely would have if it had been possible. She does a fantastic breakdown of all of the points brought up here in this video as well, the social issues, the dress history, and down to in depth knowledge about the damage to the dress itself. I feel like possibly many people have not understood the trouble that clothing and costume historians and departments of museums have in accessing pieces. Justine pointed out the exact problem here too which is that people don't count it as an artform and something that should be value. As such museums get little to no funding for those departments and are struggling constantly to change the public's perception, interest, and value in this topic.
It’s strange, because I find costume exhibits more interesting than paintings and sculpture. Clothes tell one so much about history and life from a time period.
What's interesting is nobody says that Kim Kardashian is fat yet many people falsely believe Marilyn Monroe was plus size. Even after a starvation diet Kim couldn't fit into that dress.
Wow, Justine. You did a terrific job of researching this topic and giving a fair and dispassionate assessment of the controversy. Great job!
Personally, I don’t understand why she chose to wear the dress in the first place. She should have known it wouldn’t fit per proportions, no matter how much weight she lost. It also doesn’t flatter her skin tone. I think it’s always better to wear something that suits you rather than squeeze into something just because you think it’s pretty.
She had to wear the real one for the attention. Wearing a more flattering copy would have been completely forgettable and for a manufactured celebrity's lifestyle, attention is oxygen.
@@myladycasagrande863 Like I get the need for attention but the dress didn't suit her nor fit her (dieting this way is kinda ...concerning).
And if she was changing literally four minutes later, she could've had a more flattering version for herself, since the original was made with intention to look like nude dress.
🤷♀
Justine said it well, it’s about the attention/publicity and in today’s 🌍 that equals $$$$
Kardash just proved one more time, what everybody has already known: she is just a vulgar rich woman, who has to "borrow" somebody's glory in order to shine in this reflected light. Marilyn was a great actress with a very tragic life & death. She was real, and so was her passion and her pain. And Kardash is just a simple moneybag, which cares only about profit.
For attention, and publicity.
That’s how their whole family business run.
From the perspective of fashion historians, the sins committed were many and egregious - and they could have serious ramifications for the Met's Costume Institute, in support of which the Met Gala is held each year. Can the Institute maintain its integrity as a museum dedicated to the conservation and research into historical dress when, it appears, it depends for its funding on donations from elites who may then turn around and borrow historically-significant garments to wear, in direct violation of its mission.
Worse yet is that Kim was enabled in this by the Met Gala board itself (headed by Anna Wintour), furnished with a room in which she could change into the replica. While there has been a long association between modern fashion media and the Met Gala (Diana Vreeland had headed the Board before Wintour), there seems to be a growing conflict in motive between the organizers of the Gala and the Institute that the event is intended to benefit. It does not help that Wintour has paid an inordinate degree of attention to the Kardashian-Jenner clan, perhaps beyond what would be appropriate for the editor-in-chief of the world's most famous fashion magazine.
My sentiments exactly!
Hi Justine, Fabric is art and so is the designs of how to wear it! I frequent thrift stores to find amazing fabrics to repurpose. Not all Americans follow the Kardashians, tell the world!!! You look so content and happy, and I am happy for you that you have found your home at last. 🌸
I too prefer thrifting. I call it my urban hunting.
I prefer thrift as well for many reasons
The fabric has likely been washed, which means I know how it will wear.
It is less expensive if you gain or lose weight or need temporary clothing, which also reduces the demand for fast fashion.
Things cost less so then I don’t feel compelled to hold on to them forever if someone else can use them.
You can find some really luxe and nicely tailored items, like Brooks Brothers pants, several higher end dresses (including a Halston from Bergdorf Goodman), and cashmere sweaters.
Very interesting points. What I found shocking about K wearing that dress has nothing to do with fashion. If, for example, she had worn Marilyn's iconic white "steam grate" dress I would not have given it a second thought. It was the juxtaposition of this dress and the Madison Square event with the political historical context of that time that really makes this more than about fashion, or actually not about fashion at all. M's affairs with the Kennedy brothers, the FBI scrutiny of that, the rumors of a dove-tailing of Hollywood, politics, and organized crime, the changing nature of what was taboo to the press, the over- the- top sexuality of the dress basically confirming the affairs, not to mention Jackie being in the audience, the beginnings of a sexual revolution in the US, all added up to a very unique turning point in US politics which was occurring at that time. Kim K may be a somethimg of a cultural phenomenon now but her influence doesnt come close to how this dress symbolized a critical historical time. It's like K tried to piggyback that for more exposure and just miserably failed. In a hundred years, that event at Madison Square Garden will still be historically and politically significant while the Kardashians will be a footnote along with 80s aerobic knee socks and plastic 70s dresses.
My sentiments exactly! Kardash-flock should have kept their greedy hands away from Marilyn's dress.
While I personally don't care much about the dress specifically, a lot of people do. If someone bought a cherished painting by Rembrandt (or someone of equivalent historical significance) and stabbed it all over with a knife, in our current system it's completely legal for them to do so, but that doesn't make it okay. Legal and moral are different concepts. Some things are part of our shared human history. More and more people are angry about the wealth inequality inherent in capitalism and seeing how the super-rich can buy widely-cherished unique historical items for themselves and trash them understandably emphasizes the immense unearned power and privilege of the ruling class. They're doing the same thing to the Earth, a thing that surely should belong to all of us.
the dress shouldn't be owned by Ripley, it should be in a proper museum, it's a piece of history, fashion is art.
Thanks for this! The most sensible video on this topic I've seen or heard!
I don't know how you can compare a woman who is famous for simply being famous and Marilyn, a critically-acclaimed actress whose beauty will go down in history. Kim? Not so much.
This is such a great analysis on the Marilyn vs Kim dress controversy. I initially thought it was a wild idea for Marilyn's dress to be loaned to Kim, however, you've brought up a lot of great points and counterarguments that I think the collective society should think about. I think the biggest takeaway (that you touched on) is we should regard fashion as a true art form, if we want to keep iconic pieces from pop culture sacred. Also, we should feel the same away about the fashion we consume (*cough* fast fashion *cough*). All in all, a great video as always, Justine!
Based on the fact that she caused tears in the dress, I'm good with her being excommunicated from popular culture.
Note: the before/after close-ups on the dress were a) poorly lit and b) out of focus. Hardly a good basis for comparison ;-)
@@AD-wm9if It just a dress. All material things get destroy at some point. Its more important that we dont destroy earth because we live on it.
@@luzdeld we can use that argument on everything historical so. A painting of Leonardo Da Vinci got destroyed "oh, its just a painting", the church of Nothre Dame caught con fire "it was an old church anyways"... Idk about that... I think we should care about historical artifacts as well as how fast fashion is having an impact on earth. History is important to share how was life in diferent eras. We need to preserve the few things that hold value to be able to learn from our predesesors.
Edit: typo. Oops.
@@atuvera9021 Thank you very much for your comment, you are quite right.
Justine ma cherie, the simple fact that more than one person didn't believe Kim was wearing the actual Marilyn dress reveals how unreasonable the whole idea is. I personally think it's pure selfishness, there is absolutely no excuse for Kim to feel entitled to wear that dress (change her name to karen kardashian lol). But then again, how to expect something different from that family?
Thank you for the concise breakdown on the dress itself. I have very mixed feelings especially due to this being an historical garment and the overall fragility of a museum-worthy piece being worn decades later. I almost wish Kim had had a dress made specifically for her (by perhaps a new designer/different dress), just as Marilyn did.
She wore a copy for the rest of the evening, which makes ruining the original even worse.
she wore a copy of another Marilyn dress, a dark green one.
@@justineleconte that was for the after party, for the event proper it looks like she wore a copy of the nude dress.
I wonder if there are other dresses made of satin souffle that are still out there. It sounds like a really interesting type of fabric.
I think it is because that is a relic that shouldn't be on nobody's hands and second, because so many people dislike the Kardashians because of their lack in taste and common sense while having so much money.
I like this neutral viewpoint!
For Americans Marilyn Monroe is our Coco Chanel. This scandal has actually made the public aware that many American Pop Icon's Wardrobe pieces are historical museum worthy. That funding should be raised so belongings, especially fashion clothing should be purchased and preserved. Ripley's is a "sideshow" circus carnival museum, not a historical museum. So again it created awareness that many historical museums do not have the funding to purchase famous fashion pieces and it ends up being bought by private collectors.
I'm curious to hear what would be the opinion if a French controversial influencer wore Coco Chanel's personal little black dress to a celebrity event that didn't fit her. Would it be a scandal? Would there be a similar reaction? Do private collectors own a lot of Coco's wardrobe or is it in historical museums?
Thank you for the interesting video! 😊
Can you make a video about Marilyn Monroes fashion? I would love to see that 😊
Yesss, please do that Justine😽😽😽
The Channel "The Ultimate Fashion History" has that done very well!
Good points Justine!
My takeaway from all this is that we should always wear clothes in the correct size that fits us correctly. 🤭
Thank you Justine, you are just a practical, knowledgeable person and I do enjoy watching the videos you make because I know I will benefit something out it.
+Justineleconte *The dress in question was **_originally_** crafted for Marlene Dietrich; modding it for Norma Jean Monroe was a straightforward task.* Kim Kardashian has a WAY larger hip circumference than _both_ Dietrich and Monroe, should really have had a Swarowski dress crafted around her curves.
I LOVED this video and learned so much!!
I'm glad I'm not the only one thinking this!!!... thank you!
And this video is a great representation of why I like and appreciate you
Very well done video, Justine. I don't know why people were so outraged about the dress. Marilyn wore it while cooing Happy Birthday to President Kennedy, with Mrs. Kennedy sitting next to him. She had affairs with both Bobby and and Jack Kennedy. I don't understand why people think it was part of our American history. That moment was not important, and the dress is a symbol of our increasingly decadent pop culture. I am no fan of the Kardashians, but I don't care if Kim wore the dress, because there are so many more things for people to care about. And good for Kim for making a charitable donation.
I just don’t think that the “Marilyn” dress looked very good on Ms Kardashian. A replica dress in a matching skin tone would have far more flattering.
But of course, the controversy was the whole point, wasn’t it? No different from in the 1960s, really.
When Miss Monroe wore the dress to sing “Happy Birthday” to JFK, she was telling the whole world that he was having an affair with her. That was pretty tacky, too. I can just imagine how his wife Jacqueline must have felt about being publicly humiliated. Monroe’s stunt seems down right unkind when you look at it through Mrs Kennedy’s eyes.
Regardless of who owns or what type of establishment it resides in, we care. We care because she holds an iconic and wonderful place in our hearts. We want it displayed and be enjoyed and to be taken care of. Yes I am pissed that she wore it.
My sentiments exactly!
Love this video, Justine!! Awesome insight, i loved every second!!
Thanks for commenting 🤗
You're Comments and reviews are appreciated
Make a note to My trade analyst and Administrator,
Mr Daniel we have something real big to introduce you to, A life changing Investment program 💬
☎ᴛᵉˣţ𝄍▫️ 𝑾𝒉𝔮ᴛᵗ𝑠𝑨𝑝𝑝
✚𝟏𝟗𝟐𝟓𝟒𝟕𝟏𝟓𝟕𝟎𝟓✔
ʀᴇɢᴀʀᴅɪɴɢ ʙᴛᴄ///ᴇᴛʜ ɪɴᴠᴇꜱᴛᴍᴇɴᴛ ɪᴅᴇᴀꜱ👌.
Thank you for sticking/focussing on the facts!!!!
Thank you Justine amazing speech
I love the part: ..."Well implants do not shrink..." EPIC. Well said!. In any case, If this "voluptuous" (not to say otherwise) person wore the dress even if open at the back, the sole fact of forcing those humongous hips to fit in, must have had ruined certainly the fabric... ohhh but what is the problem if money can buy everything....
thank you for your intelligent in depth analysis, which makes a lot of sense, of course, rationally. It does not make me feel better about somehow ruining something precious, a memory...I am nostalgic, romantic, in love with vintage retrò style, old movies and the like, and beyond all the cold facts, press/money/etc aspects, it just pained me because Marilyn is special to me while the other woman I consider a symbol of so much that is simply trash in our modern culture, including of course "the way they function" and the fact that money can buy and destroy anything... bisous...looking forward to your nest house updates!
I don’t understand why people got “genuinely angry” or if it was in fact genuine at all. You touched on several great points. Thank you for breaking it all down.
Loved the analysis
Pattison Group toured the dress in W Canada a few years ago to promote new groc stores opening. Dress was in bullet proof display case with security also. Terrific commentary Justine.
Great video, Justine! Thanks!
Very nice dissection of the case☺️☺️☺️
Very very smart analyze! ALways love your sharp and witty POV, Justine :)
You have completely changed my view on this, Justine. I was OUTRAGED, but .. no. Well done for keeping it real.
And Kim is laughing her way to bank!I and Ripley is back in business again!
Love your dress or top. Is it from your collection? Fantastic video!!!
Voice of reason as per usual. I feel humbled
Always love yr style and comments.
Excellently broken down argument. Good fashion is art, whether high end or high street and museums need to be serious about collecting and preserving pieces. Years ago I went to a Valentino exhibition, it was stunning.I remember seeing icon dresses like Jackie Onassis wedding dress (2nd wedding). I also saw a Mary Quant exhibition with icon styles but some of the materials hzd started to decay because moths had managed to attack the fabric.
Great video - and perfectly on point.
Thank you for the most informative video I have watched this year! Not because you talked about the dress, but because you researched and presented facts logically! I respect that alot
Then you should watch Aby Cox's vídeo on this to see the perspective of a fashion historian ;)
I am the winner, for, I just got to see and hear you describe the whole story. I do so enjoy your eloquence and point of view. Smiling, George.
Thank you for the beautiful video
Excellent video! Both Ripleys and KK are masters of promotion. It’s an obvious collab that promotes both of them!
Sewn into the dress. That takes guts. Who has that much confidence in their bladder control?
Maybe it's because I'm not American, but I love your perspective so much. The French are wonderful.
Well said, nothing to add.
I love this black satin (?) blouse (?) on you. The centre front detail is beautiful.
It's a Helmut Lang dress, in thick fabrics, that's why it can almost "stand". I like that it is all-black and yet includes different fabrics and textures: plain weave, satin weave, velvet surface finishing.
that really cleared my view about the whole fiasco. an honest thank you.
Thanks for commenting 🤗
You're Comments and reviews are appreciated
Make a note to My trade analyst and Administrator,
Mr Daniel we have something real big to introduce you to, A life changing Investment program 💬
☎ᴛᵉˣţ𝄍▫️ 𝑾𝒉𝔮ᴛᵗ𝑠𝑨𝑝𝑝
✚𝟏𝟗𝟐𝟓𝟒𝟕𝟏𝟓𝟕𝟎𝟓✔
ʀᴇɢᴀʀᴅɪɴɢ ʙᴛᴄ///ᴇᴛʜ ɪɴᴠᴇꜱᴛᴍᴇɴᴛ ɪᴅᴇᴀꜱ👌
I have so much to say about this but I will make it brief. I am furious that KK would EVEN THINK to wear this historical dress at 60 years of age. There is evidence she has ruined this very, very delicate fabric that they don’t even make anymore. Stones are missing. Ripleys Believe It Or Not bought it for 4.8 million in 2016. RBON as you know is not an accredited museum (and there are 33 of them in the States here) but kind of a cheap exhibition show. Orlando was chosen bc of the mecca of attractions there. I am so sick and tired of ALL the Kardashians. What poor role models to say the least for women especially younger women. There this didn’t turn out so brief!
Fabulous video and analysis ...as always, Justine!
Totally agree with everything you say in this video! 👏 👏 👏 👏
Thank you for saying that all of us should be concerned about where our own clothes come from! AMEN! I think we all win when we lift each other up. Love and good vibes to all 〰〰
Loved this video. Straight to the point and very informative. ❤️
Her videos always are. No rambling, gets to the point and always well thought out and pertaining to the topic.
Chapeau! Justine, this video is a masterclass. i worked for almost 30 years in advertising and this is what you do, you calculate the risk... huuuge winner Ripley, believe it or not ;)
i love love LOVE these „picking apart/commentary“ videos! they are so well researched and presented - just a joy to watch.
thank you!
I never considered there was such a great profit in leading Marylin Monroes dress. Very interesting perspective.
I learn so much from you!
The voice of reason!
excellent thought provoking commentary as usual!
👏🏽 finally someone talking some sense
Interesting take. I don't agree with your opinion but you raised some interesting points so thank you for posting this video.
The only thing that I find interesting about this is the public reaction. I wonder if someone less polarizing than Kim wore the dress if anyone would have cared. I feel like people were only upset because it was her. Did most people even know this dress still existed before this? Probably not. And you're right, the owner of the dress can do whatever they want with it. Kim said in an interview that the theme was American fashion, and what's more iconic than this dress. It's not that deep people.
It makes me want to just make my own that matches my shape and skin tone (but with a zipper). I foresee people from seeing communities making their own skin toned matching ones for Halloween this year
It depends under which conditions the dress was lend. Better to wear original for the red carpet and a copy for the party. Were people expecting her not even sit on a chair the whole evening? The complaints from the dress owners to the media were kind of lame...
It would be interesting to know if the V&A, which has a big collection of clothes, attended the auction in 2016.
I don't know - but it would make more sense for American museums to want to buy it. Or private collectors who want to loan the piece to a museum later.
That was a fun, and educational, video! TY
Thanks for commenting 🤗
You're Comments and reviews are appreciated
Make a note to My trade analyst and Administrator,
Mr Daniel we have something real big to introduce you to, A life changing Investment program 💬
☎ᴛᵉˣţ𝄍▫️ 𝑾𝒉𝔮ᴛᵗ𝑠𝑨𝑝𝑝
✚𝟏𝟗𝟐𝟓𝟒𝟕𝟏𝟓𝟕𝟎𝟓✔
ʀᴇɢᴀʀᴅɪɴɢ ʙᴛᴄ///ᴇᴛʜ ɪɴᴠᴇꜱᴛᴍᴇɴᴛ ɪᴅᴇᴀꜱ👌.
And this is why I keep following your channel, impecable content!
Thank you! ☺️
Amazingly thoughtful video - thank you for the information on the dress. Personally, I understand Ripley can do whatever he wants with the dress... but, it was what I consider a trashy move. There are things in our history that are iconic and it just looks disrespectful to those icons to wear their clothing. I guess we can look forward to her wearing Dorothy's clothes. It's just disrespectful to our memories of a much loved historic figure.
But, trashy is the Kardashian trade.
Well that Dress mite start to travel to all the different Ripley’s across the US. Mite get lucky and it comes to the one that’s 30 minutes away from me. I would go see it. Also Ripley’s has some really odd and interesting stuff. Like paintings on spiders web.
thank you for your insights
Kardashian thought she could steal Marilyn Monroe style and glamour, but she doesn't have it. Good luck to Kardashian that in dressing that fatal dress, she didn't got the bad "juju" rubbed in her and go the same way as the original owner. It was after that "scandalous" dress that everything went wrong for Marilyn.
Hi Justine, good video. When you made your point about fashion being considered a lower level art (if any sadly sometimes) came to my mind your video about a trip to London and thought if you have visited Victoria&Albert Museum (vam.ac.uk)- for art, design and performance - which has organised many many times fashion exhibitions (2 at the moment) and the fashion museum on the Southbank. There are museums that give fashion it's value as art and in my opinion as an invaluable tool to interpret history. Take care, love your channel.
You brought up a lot of points I hadn’t even considered! Very thought provoking video. Personally, I didn’t have any moral outrage about the dress being lent out, I was just irritated with Kim for wearing the dress and damaging it. I’ve never been a fan of hers, I don’t really think her style is all that interesting, and I saw her choosing to wear Marilyn’s dress as a cheap move for the press, which as you aptly said, is “how the Kardashians operate”.
Kardash just proved one more time, what everybody has already known: she is just a vulgar rich woman, who has to "borrow" somebody's glory in order to shine in this reflected light. Marilyn was a great actress with a very tragic life & death. She was real, and so was her passion and her pain. And Kardash is just a simple moneybag, which cares only about profit.
exactly, you just trashed her because you don't like her.
I agree. If someone was to wear the dress, without altering it... That would have been ok, or ok-ish.
But she had it modified
Which... Not so great
She's like most people at the 'top', their self absorbed borderline 'narcissists'. That's why they are where they are, because they always want more and nothing they currently have is good enough. I think that's why people kick off about small things like this dress. It's not the dress, it's the excessiveness and self centered ego we can't stand. Especially in a time where excessiveness is causing so much destruction.
@@jiminycricket6428 Very well said! Thank you!
This is the most intelligent, thorough, thoughtful and balanced coverage of this dress that I have seen. It really helped me understand the whole phenomenon. So many good points, and all well explained. Thanks, Justine!
You should watch Abby Cox video for an in-depth discussion of why this is a problem and why it shouldn’t have happened. Extremely intelligent and thought out statements made by someone with the credentials to back it up. Clothing and textile history is her whole entire career.
@@Chaotic_Pixie I watched that one but seeing this video with the explanation of it being a copy I'm not sure it's such an issue as it was made out to be.
Le verità sono due. La prima è che il vestito di Marylin è caduto in mani sbagliate. La seconda è che alla kardashan stava malissimo. Brutto ma brutto assai..
@@Nelly-J Justine just explained that it’s NOT a copy. It was the original and didn’t actually fit her. The back had to be left open. That’s why she has the white stole covering her back side.
@@Chaotic_Pixie Read my statement above! This happens more often than you think. I have a friend who worked for the Royal Opera House in London and Paris Opera. Both theaters have huge costume collections dating back several hundred years. For special events, these costumes are taken out, worn and even danced in. It's a huge honor to wear the same robes as Beverly Sills and Luciano Pavarotti!
"Marilyn is perfect because she's gone, and every passing decade makes her even more perfect in the collective memory." YES. The dress was a publicity stunt, and now it's a publicity stunt again.
that sums it up well
Marilyn is perfect because she was authentic.
@@jeanlaubenthal698 Sadly she wasn't. She was a very intelligent woman who admitted in her journal that she hated that men didn't take her seriously and only regarded her as an ornament. She was what the world wanted her to be and it broke her.
@ where is this journal :O
It isnt about being perfect. We simply adore her AND the place in history she holds. Sure some things may be more important. This doesn't negate the fact that I don't want someone else in 2022 wearing it and certainly not being carless with it. Maybe not everyone thinks of it this deeply. I didn't know MM after all but she has a part in and a place in women's history. Its the Juxtaposition of KK for me. One women's struggle, achievement, art
Aside someone with less esteem.
I wonder if Ripley’s understands that Kim wearing it REDUCED the value of the dress?
lol
I don't think historical clothing should be worn by anyone. Period.
"Even if you do a diet implants do not shrink" preach!!!!
Thank you Justine for the history of the dress. You are right about, we need to be VERY CONCERNED about where WE OURSELVES are getting our clothes made. 😔
That was a great point that shut it all down 😆. No one can point fingers cuz most of us have 3 pointing back! And also her other zinger was pointing out how Marylin gets more perfect as the decades go on. It reminds me of a quote "mean people never die". You can substitute any unsavory word. But point is we make people out to be so angelic and perfect once they pass. Marylin was prob just as scandalous as Kim lol. No need to be so emotionally distraught them two were kinda cut from the same cloth 🤣🤣(pun absolutely intended) 💁.
@@chenanigans I liked your pun 😄
@@justineleconte hey thanks! 😄😍
@@chenanigans
No.
They were NOT cut from the same cloth.
Sartorial necromancy. Very creepy and almost trying to steal her limelight.
MM was degraded in her own time and now can't even have the one dress designed exactly for her. It's shameful another woman did this to her. Copycats should still be respectful and she had a replica ready to go. Should've made it match her own skin for same effect, as homage, not rip-off.
Wonderful analogy! I couldn’t agree more!
She was not ALONE to do this.
It was ...collaboration...
I call it sacrilege.
Who cares? You don't own it not your problem.
I think you mean necrophilia. Necromancy is magic.
I was shocked that Kim… who had a different body type and skin tone… wanted to wear the original, because it didn’t fit… and she didn’t wear it as well (without undies) like Marilyn did. She also had a better fitting copy made, that she wore for the rest of the gala. Why not just wear that, for the red carpet too… and just mention it being “like Marilyn’s”? Probably because she wanted the “media drama” and perhaps the “I am important enough that I can get whatever I want.” 🤷🏻♀️
Of course she wanted the drama, and she got what she wanted. Same with Marilyn . She wore that dress purely to show off her hoeing around tendencies. (I mean Marilyn)
elite Hollywood narcissist at its finest!!
Thank you for explaining.
Unfortunately Kim Kardashian has a massive ego and thinks she can do what ever she likes, because of her money and celebrity status.
It should never have been worn by anyone.
Is someone now, going to want to wear her Some like it Hot dress. I hope not.
If this ain’t one of the most perfectly executed videos of 2022, I do not know what is. 0 nonsense, 0 clickbait, just hard facts.
Keep it up, sister. ❤️🔥
Thank you!!
Ms Kardashian is like Cindirellas's sister, trying to fit the beautiful shoe that was not hers. Wanted to be iconic too😂
Haha, that's a good metaphor actually. 😉
And Kim ALWAYS FAILS MISERABLY to be even a bit above verage, much less "iconic."
What the World gained with Kim wearing Merilyns dress? Nothing! So basically a part of history is destroyed in order to gain nothing. This is completely disrespectful toward Merilyns heritage. She had been used in her life, but even 60 years later. Very sad!
Here is one of the outraged conservators. I disagree here. The dress was damaged, no doubt about that. The gloves were ridiculous and actually damaging themselves, there only to suggest ‘care’ that was clearly not there. Besides a curator is not the professional figure to assist in a situation like this. The state of that dress was altered and interfered with forever. This may not necessarily be a negative fact in all instances, but in this case what was it for? A caprice?
I really don’t think what can be seen as a smart economic move is a good move per se.
Thank you for sharing your perspective. Her listing the economic aspect of this as a positive just irked me.
I've heard the expression of stepping into someone else's shoes.
Kim stepping into
Monroe 's dress and butchering it, shows she is no original. 🤷♀️
"I wish people cared that much about where their own clothes come from." Yes! Stellar point and so well said. Not a fan of any of the K fam at all and still don't think she should have worn it but your video massively puts it all into perspective. Well done. Merci.
💯
From what I understand, the Met, Winter have to approve the dresses. People are angry that they allowed it. Not just Ripley's.
That's what I am seeing to - but I do follow mostly people knowledgeable in historical costume and fashion - people are not against the actions of just Kim or just Ripley's, but the whole situation where something like this can even happen so easily for clout and profit
@@hypatiakovalevskayasklodow9195 Exactly!
People are complaining that they want the dress in a museum. Kim wears it to a museum and people get all mad and huffy! 🙄
I don't think it's hypocritical for museums to be upset that an artifact was damaged just because they didn't purchase it. There could be a lot of reasons for that other than that they didn't want it or that they don't value fashion as high art.
Right. Museums are interested in historic artifacts, that is their expertise, so naturally they have strong opinions about such things.
I think this review by Justine (I respect you but I do not agree on this one ) is over simplified
@@corimi7341 this. We have photographic evidence of the dress being stretched out with some stones missing. We have so many textile conservationists talking about how the dress would have been damaged even if someone smaller than Marylin wore it because of body oils, movement, and UV exposure. The cotton gloves were a terrible choice because they catch on the material. Conservationists say the dress should have only been handled with nitrile gloves.
“I wish people cared this much about where their own clothes came from.” Justine makes the mistake of thinking people can’t do both, and because this was her focus, she didn’t bother doing more research.
Many (probably most) museums have a "scope of interest" when collecting and preserving. A textile museum won't collect an Apple computer. A glass museum glass won't be interested in collecting baseballs. The museum of the American Revolution isn't going to be in the business of collecting JFK political memorabilia or 19th century Chinese export pottery. That doesn't mean that they don't care or "should have bought it" if they cared. This is a reminder that private collectors are have no obligation to actually care for the items in their collections. That said, I'm not sure a museum would ever be interested in hiring whatever "experts" went along with this stunt.
@@corimi7341 I agree with you!
Abby Cox did a video on this as well, from her perspective as a dress historian, and she explains really well why Kim Kardashian wearing this dress - even if it's just for four minutes - is a really big deal for dress and pop culture history. Most dress history departments in museums also don't have big budgets at all (people tend not to know how little money most museums have at their disposal, except the big ones of course), and the Met doesn't provide funding for their's at all. That's the whole reason why the Met Gala is even a thing in the first place. To secure funding. Unfortunately, only Ripley had the funds to buy this dress.
Thanks for that background.
+
I enjoyed Abby’s analysis too
This is really important information. Justine talked as if people who care about history didn't care about buying it when they had the opportunity forgetting that not all museums have the same money as the Louvre.
@@nanda483 when you do research, there's always more things to uncover and more angles to be explored. It's likely that in preparation for the video Justine didn't have enough time to look into which museums could realistically afford to buy the dress. Alternatively, the info on museums' budgets might not be publicly available, hence impossible to compare.
Hi Justine, thank you for the video, well-researched as always. While you bring interesting and valid points to support the decision of KK and Ripley, the debate around wearing the dress is one of morals and ethics. Are you implying that because Kim paid/made a donation and Ripley got promotion this makes it ok? So what if a few years ago more conservative museums didn't buy the dress? Does that nullify their concern for what is now a museum artefact? Maybe they realized they made a mistake, made they didn't, but they can still express their professional opinion on the issue and we shouldn't be so quick to dismiss it because they didn't pay years ago. Is this where we're headed? Pay up and we'll listen? I wholeheartedly agree with you that we should be concerned with the sourcing of our clothing, but what's that got to do with a pop/social/ethics debate? Using the same logic, but pushing it further, there are people in the world suffering of hunger - isn't frivolous to be concerned with fashion? Why aren't we more outraged about that instead of clothing sourcing? People were upset by the entitlement brought on by millions of dollars which allows certain people to eschew social norms and conventions, i.e., rules don't apply to me. That's what stands at the core of the debate. Add to that, the potential destruction of the dress itself. Your video seems to say that's ok, and let's think clothes' sourcing.
While we're on that, if we want to be completely honest, most people can't afford to always buy ethically sourced clothing, so whether we want it or not, fast fashion is going to be the main provider. From what I ve noticed, some fast fashion brands are trying to be more careful to the environment and to human rights. That aside, it's not fair to deviate attention from what is an important social/ethical debate, even with a dress at the middle of if, to guilt tripping individuals about their buying choices. Both are important issues, and they can definitely co-exist.
Anyway, I always watch your content with pleasure, it wasn't the case with this one, but I'm still a fan. My comment is not meant to bring any vitriol or throw any shade and I hope it might sparks a reconsideration of the issue at hand. Always a subscriber and a virtual friend, G.
If you owned a Monet, you get to do what you want with it. Ripley's owned it. They let her wear it. There's nothing morally wrong in either of those decisions. Also, if an actress was sleeping with a married US president and his brother and then publicly sang happy birthday in a nude see-through dress nowadays, I think the same people who call Marilyn an icon would call that woman.... insulting things.
Question: Who wore it better? My opinion is MARILYN wore it better! Kim shouldn't have horned in on another's fame, she should get her own iconic dress if she wants one.
EXCELLENT points Justine!!! Scientifically, it is impossible that the dress was not damaged JUST in her putting it on whether or not the damage is visible!! I absolutely cannot agree that KK is comparable to MM as a cultural icon, however, no!!! It is this illusion that KK is so obviously trying to cultivate by wearing the dress!
I believe no one was meant to ever wear that dress after MM. Kind of takes a dump on the whole point of the dress.