Something Old, Nothing New

Oh, I am a woman obsessed. 

When making the rounds on my favorite designers' websites, a tiny little icon caught my eye on Dame Westwood's homepage, which led me here: 

 

Honestly, what's there to say? I still love the original dress, but this is just blatant greed. It looks obviously cheap compared to the original design, especially the back; why is the top layer so skimpy, was the duchess satin too expensive? And the proportions are way off. The pointy bust is too tall for a dress that short, and the fullness of the skirt doesn't work well with the ridiculously unflattering length either, which on a normal woman would fall probably right below the knee.

She was obviously going for a more RTW version of the gown, but it falls seriously short (no pun intended). Move on, Viv! You hated the movie, don't try to capitalize on it. 

The Paradoxical Body

I took a little trip to the Metropolitan Museum of Art the other day to revisit the Superheroes: Fashion and Fantasy exhibit and, luckily, I was able to sneak a picture of one of my many muses, namely a mannequin decked out in (one of) the original costume Michelle Pfeiffer wore in Batman Returns when she played Catwoman. Every since I was a little gayby, I adored that costume in particular, and I found it as a major source of inspiration later in life. 

The patchwork construction of the black vinyl and white thread that conforms to the body perfectly, I feel, makes this garment almost a living, breathing being. That sounds a little strange, but really look at it; the tension and frenzy is oozing out of every seam. With the risk of sounding hyperbolic, I find it to be one of the most successful costumes in film. It hearkens back to the original source (that of the comics) while being something completely new, unique, and appropriate. It really is a testament to how a costume truly defines a character. Despite the talent Ms. Pfeiffer undoubtedly has, if she had been in a different costume (especially one that didn't pinch her face nor required massive amounts of talcum powder to squish into) her performance would not have been as good.

Unfortunately, the exhibit closes in September, and I will have no time to skillfully map out the security system of the museum well enough to plan any sort of burglary of this work of art. Sigh... 

On a related tack, I recommend this exhibition very much, if for nothing but because you can see real costumes and haute couture looks up close. And, if you're daring enough, touch them.

Turn On, Tune In, Drop Out.

http://www.barneys.com/Tune%20in.%20Turn%20on.%20Drop%20off/BABBLE22,default,sc.html

Let us get past the fact that an upscale, commercial department store is attempting to capitalize off of one Dr. Timothy Leary and his iconic quote. But that fact that they didn't even get the order right?  Disgraceful. Not to mention that they are exploiting a decades old counterculture movement and (as expected) recycling. Besides, that whole little "restoring" program is just bullshit. They're wasting as much energy to refurbish those shirts, and once again if the same amount of fabric, dye, and labor is being utilized, there's absolutely nothing beneficial taking place. If anything, they're producing more waste. If they want the program to be effective, they would diminish the size of their orders next season.

For more info on Timothy Leary (and to figure out why I am so irritated if you are so inclined) click here. 

ETA: There's actually even a mistake on that website; the correct order is in fact "Turn on, Tune in, Drop Out" as evidenced by his book of that title. 

Green is the Scene

I was at JC Penney the other day buying a frame. Exciting, right? Well, anyway, I noticed on the plastic bag the woman gave me there was a little notation on the bag that said "Recycle at a JC Penney near you" or something to that effect. In a rare instance of unprovoked audacity on my part, I asked the woman what that meant, knowing in good conscience that that kind of plastic is not recyclable. She said that they will reuse the bags for future purchases. I then blurted out would they would cut down on the amount of bags they produce then? She said she didn't think so. And I was just baffled. That's not recycling at all. The same amount of plastic is being produced, and therefore nothing is changing. So...why promote the fallacy that they are recycling? Oh, right, because "being green" is trendy. 

Well, normally, it would be distressing to see something like being eco-friendly fall the way of Chinese slippers and Beanie Babies, but then I tried making a metaphor. Realistically, even though the rapid climate changes and depleting ozone are apparent, we still have no concrete evidence it's caused by an access of fossil fuels, although it's probably the best explanation we have as of now. So, if it is our consumer ways that are trashing the planet, that's never going to stop, even if it becomes unpopular. 

So, think of it this way: you see someone running from a lion. You think it looks cool, so you start running from the lion too. Before you know it, everyone is running from lions. After a while, though, you're going to get tired and want to stop. But the lions won't. So, even though you may not want to do it anymore, if you want to save your hide,  you'll keep running for your life. Lest the lions tear you to pieces...

Always a Bridesmaid, never with Pride...

On this whole nuptial vein of thought, I got to thinking about bridesmaids. Specifically, the dresses the bride picks out for them. Seriously, what the fuck? How can anyone possibly think a sugar pink tulle skirt and a polyester taffeta peasant blouse look good? It's just baffling how little taste so many people can have. Is it a conspiracy? Do brides just want everyone to snicker and chortle at the ugly bridesmaids so that they will be the most beautiful? As if they don't get enough embarrassment! Honestly.

For Richer or Poorer.

"And if I don't ever get married or have a baby, what? I get bubkes?"

Between the Cosmos and Manolos, Carrie Bradshaw injected her brand of sociological questions in Sex and the City. In season 6's "A Woman's Right to Shoes", she wonders why we are pressured to buy and give pre-registered gifts to people who make specific life choices, such as getting married or having children. But, as she points out, what if you don't want to do these things? Why don't you get, in a sense, "rewarded" just the same? It doesn't take any particular skill to get married, and it takes considerably less skill to bear offspring, so couldn't one argue that there's no plausible reason to honor this with material goods? Well, this one does. 

Let's put aside any joy or happiness you feel from a close friend participating in these activities. In fact, let's say you couldn't care less (I don't). Why then should you have to bear witness to these events, and reward them? Is it good behavior for someone to get married? Do they really deserve gifts? Maybe they do. Maybe it's just a way of showing your affection and approval, or your way of helping out the new couple although if they don't have enough money to support themselves, they probably just shouldn't get married). But that doesn't change the fact that the action may never be reciprocated if you never do the same thing. And it's not even about the money, it's about society's view on choices: certain ones are "good" and deserve attention and gifts, and certain ones are "bad" deserving no praise or prize. How backwards can the world still be?

Obviously this all is reiterated in that particular episode of Sex and the City, but I share the sentiments. and pass them along.

Third Times a Charm

rating:

Since my views conform to that of NY Times writer Charles Isherwood, I'll just post a link to his review.

Jeez, these just get shorter and shorter, don't they? Eh. Well, wait, I'll expand. The biggest problem with this musical is its lack of coherent plot. Even though there have been many successful musicals without a clear narrative (Sondheim's Company, for example) in this case it was clear the musical was trying to have a story, but failed. Whatever vestige of said story was jumbled and predictable.

Fabulous choreography, though.

Review Times Two

rating:

After falling in love with her writing talents on HBO's Six Feet Under,  I decided to delve a little deeper into researching Jill Soloway. After finding out many different bits and bobs about her (including a humorous story she penned entitled "Courtney Cox's Asshole") I discovered her first book: Tiny Ladies in Shiny Pants. A book of funny, personal essays, she made me laugh while making me think. It's not as if the book was so scholarly or deep, but there's a small thread sewn between all of her stories characterized by neo-feminism, vague misanthropy and unconventional thinking. 

Even though some entries are slow and frivolous (Jill honey, I understand your dislike for dogs, but who the hell cares to hear you rant about it for so many pages?), Ms. Soloway doesn't disappoint with her three year old book.