Marilyn's Dress ruined by Kim K

[Matata]

Kim is such an a@@hole

A very rich one thanks to the idjits that made her so. Imo, it's much ado about nothing. She wore it to sing to the married president of the US with whom she allegedly had an affair. It is not, imo, worthy of being preserved as an important cultural artifact.

 

[mrs-b]

Marilyn Monroe was a size 14. How come size 2 Kim needed to lose 16 lbs to wear the dress? Also Marilyn was 5’6”.

For what this is worth, Marilyn's autopsy report is available to see online. She was 117 lbs when she died - no way a size 14.

 

[mrs-b]

Kim is such an a@@hole.

Well, I don't know about that. But at least she knew where to put her arms when she wore the second Marilyn dress. If you want to talk about someone stretching a dress - take a gander at the armholes cutting into MM's underarms because she's dragged them forward because she thought the dress was meant to be a halter neck. And the strap that was meant to run side to side across her back, holding the sides of the dress together, has been permanently stretched, given that the whole dress was out of whack. Where the heck was her dresser??

 

[AnastasiaBeaverhausen]

The smallest dress size you could buy during Marilyn’s lifetime was an 8 — sizing conventions, as well as the size (and shape) of American bodies, have changed a lot in the last 60 years. Even at MM’s most zaftig (right around Some Like It Hot), she was roughly the equivalent of a modern 6.

When she wore this spangled number, her measurements were 35.5” - 23.5” - 33.5”. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a person on this side of the millennium who’s built like that! Like, not even a Victoria’s Secret Angel.

Kim K has a rockin’ figure — not knocking it — but, by contrast, her hips are something like 41”. So yeah, not 6 dress sizes smaller…

Edit: I swear I don’t have some kind of disturbing fixation on celebrities’ body measurements . I minored in costume history in college and just really like old clothes, despite the fact that most don’t fit me, either!

I once heard that clothing sizes were different back then. That a size 14 then is more like a size 6 or something nowadays.

 

[Lookinagain]

The smallest dress size you could buy during Marilyn’s lifetime was an 8 —

Ah, that is just not true. There may have not been 2 or 4 sizes in many places, but they existed. I own a few vintage dresses from the 50's and early 60's that are labeled size 4. And they fit me when I was a 4. Probably not now. But I was alive before MM died, yes, young, but my mother definitely wore a 6. Beginning in the records that I have of her from about 1947. she was a model and I do have the info.
But agree that the numbers of dress sizes have changed. they want to make a size 10 feel like a 6 as they assume, maybe correctly, that it makes women buy more.

 

[Lookinagain]

I once heard that clothing sizes were different back then. That a size 14 then is more like a size 6 or something nowadays.

well, I agree that is somewhat true. What is an 8 now is probably more of a 10 or 12 then. I don't really think a 14 dropped down to a 6. Otherwise someone today who is a 12 or 14 would have been well out of the normal realm of sizing.

 

[AnastasiaBeaverhausen]

Here's 1 website I found on the topic. It's not the end all be all, but I thought it was interesting.

Marilyn Monroe's True Size. Her clothing tells the truth.

Read about Marilyn Monroe's actual size, and she wasn't "plus sized" after all. Her personal clothing items prove just how small she truly was.

themarilynmonroecollection.com

 

[Mary Queen of Scotch]

Ah, that is just not true. There may have not been 2 or 4 sizes in many places, but they existed. I own a few vintage dresses from the 50's and early 60's that are labeled size 4. And they fit me when I was a 4. Probably not now. But I was alive before MM died, yes, young, but my mother definitely wore a 6. Beginning in the records that I have of her from about 1947. she was a model and I do have the info.
But agree that the numbers of dress sizes have changed. they want to make a size 10 feel like a 6 as they assume, maybe correctly, that it makes women buy more.

I buy that, simply because women’s dress sizing has always been frustratingly non-standardized! You can also find clothes from the 1940s-50s that are labeled size 16 to indicate it’s for a 16 year old, for example. I confess to broad strokes, but I think my point stands!

well, I agree that is somewhat true. What is an 8 now is probably more of a 10 or 12 then. I don't really think a 14 dropped down to a 6. Otherwise someone today who is a 12 or 14 would have been well out of the normal realm of sizing.

It’s typically reported that Marilyn wore a 12, and her garments fit on a modern size 6 dress form. I find a difference of 3 dress sizes totally believable, and in line with what I’ve personally experienced (although, again, not without exception).

Anyway, this is totally not my hill! Although I would love to see some pics of your vintage dresses

 

[mrs-b]

Grotesque implants, down there.

I don't think it's appropriate for men to be commenting on the individual parts of a woman's body and calling them grotesque - or anything else, for that matter.

But I've gotta say - if *this* is grotesque, the rest of us are pretty much screwed.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

Here's 1 website I found on the topic. It's not the end all be all, but I thought it was interesting.

Marilyn Monroe's True Size. Her clothing tells the truth.

Read about Marilyn Monroe's actual size, and she wasn't "plus sized" after all. Her personal clothing items prove just how small she truly was.

themarilynmonroecollection.com

That's actually a very intetesting article
i was always under the impression she was a NZ size 16 but she is much slimmer
i feel kinda bad reading about her weight and measurements,

 

[Demon]

I once heard that clothing sizes were different back then. That a size 14 then is more like a size 6 or something nowadays.

Oh, they absolutely have changed. I have a couple of shirts from decades ago that are size medium, and I swim in them. These days I have to buy a large and I do not swim in that.

 

[AprilBaby]

When I got married I was about 36/27/36 and I wore a size 12. 136 lbs. My friend now weighs about 180, 36/30/36 or so and she wears a size 8.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

When I got married I was about 36/27/36 and I wore a size 12. 136 lbs. My friend now weighs about 180, 36/30/36 or so and she wears a size 8.

as if it wasn't already hard enough to buy clothes on line trying to work out international sizes
this is why i buy my Bruce Springsteen tees in mens sizes

 

[autumngems]

This doesn't make sense to me. I saw the photos of where the dress was stretched and how the dress was left almost completely open at the back, and there was no pull at all where the photos say the dress was stretched - because it wasn't done up. On the other hand, I also read a report from 2017 saying the dress had damage then comparable to what appears to exist now. You can see in the photos showing the damage that it has occurred where the dress was hooked closed. But Kardashian didn't wear it closed, so that just doesn't make sense. And it wasn't left a *bit* open - it was left a LOT open. If they'd done it up and she'd sat in it - I can see that as a problem. But unzipped, standing, for a few minutes - I'm just not seeing it. I don't see why hooks that weren't closed would be showing stretch, or how a bunch of sequins could jump off in a few minutes. Also, remember it was so tight when Marilyn wore it that it had to be sewn onto her. It was also tight on the mannequin, and had been for years.

Here's how open it was at the back. You can see that where the damage is shown wasn't being pulled when Kardashian wore it.





As for the dress - (and I'm not directing this comment at you, @autumngems, but rather all the people I've seen commenting on this online) - it belongs to Ripley's Believe it Or Not. They bought it and it's theirs. They can do what they like with it. I can't stand this whole "It's iconic and belongs to the people" thing. I actually read a comment from someone on some website saying - "This dress belongs to the people! So that means this dress is MINE! How dare she wreck it!" No. It's not yours. One of the things we all love about America is its free market. The dress was for sale. It COULD have been left to a museum - but it was sold and Ripley's, a purely commercial venture, bought it. They've been displaying it as part of their Exhibits and Archives for years, but decided to take it out for a whirl. It's their dress and it's within their rights. Frankly, I think the JFK museum in Boston should have bought it - what a coup that would have been! But, since they didn't, it rightly belongs to Ripley's and they can use it as they see fit. I might not like it (tho I do tend to believe things should be used, just in general), but it's not mine to dictate.

Personally, I think Kim looked awesome, tho I did think the hair was a tad severe. Did she stretch the dress? Maybe, tho Ripley's says not (believe that or...er...not...). But I think everyone laying into her is rather unfair. She seems to me to have been at pains not to damage the dress in any way. Anyway, I think we could all probably name 50 iconic outfits off the top of our heads, so to my way of thinking, if we want to preserve something, we'd be better off trying to return famous looted works of art from the second WW to the appropriate countries, or we could have reacted more strongly to ISIL's devastation of the Old Sites in the Middle East - which was an absolute travesty and utterly heartbreaking.

And in the final analysis, the dress is back on display and will probably never be worn again. Until Ripley's goes out of business, of course, and sells off all its assets to some power crazy trillionaire who lets his mistress wear it while drinking champagne and trailing a fur around the room, singing Happy Birthday Mr President. Call me a cynic, but that seems to be the way of these things. Very little lasts forever - which is why I love diamonds.

I am assuming the stretch on the seams is where they were tugging and trying to pull it up over as seen in the video.

 

[AnastasiaBeaverhausen]

Regardless of who's more at fault, I'm just saddened that this piece of history has been destroyed. The US is a baby compared to most other countries. We haven't had much time to produce very many relics. So the fact that Marilyn is an internationally known icon (whether or not one agrees that she "deserves" that status) just makes this whole situation worse.

 

[monarch64]

I have nothing to say about the bodies of the women being discussed here. I will say that a dress is just a dress, and I’m more interested in a famous garment not because of who wore it, but who designed and made it, if it really is indeed that special.

Kim K and her mother have made their entire existence about selling scandal. Kim started out as a celeb stylist and worked for Brandy (the singer, aka Moesha from the titular sitcom in the 90s.) Kim exceeded budget by $100k and didn’t have the money to pay Brandy back. Instead, she made a sex tape with Brandy’s brother Ray J which Kris Jenner then sold to be “leaked” to the press. Boom, Kim now has the money to pay back Brandy, and a ton of infamy which she used to propel herself into the spotlight and things snowballed from there.

So do I give a rip about her “ruining” a dress worn by a woman people mocked, scorned, and mistreated for years? No. It’s just another of that family’s manipulations, and it’s not like Marilyn is here to care.

 

[doberman]

I'm of the "a dress is just a dress" opinion. Plus, I heard that there actually was no damage to the dress other than what had occurred prior to KK wearing it.

I'm totally not a fan of all things Kardashian, but their popularity is a scathing commentary on our society.

Also, clothing sizes are meaningless. I wear a size 2 in Black House White Market clothes, but in the more high-end designer dresses I wore at my children's weddings, I needed a size 8.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

its kind of hard to picture overseas sizing
last time i looked ive never even seen a size 2 except in the baby section

8 would be exceptionally tiny here and i don't know anyone who fits a 10 but i see them at the end of season sales