Transcript
Speaker: Hello, hello, and welcome to Art Pop Talk. I'm Gianna. And I'm Bianca. Today we are postponing our mall culture episode to offer you a recap of our recap on the Med Gala. That's right. With all the hot goss and museums chiming in on Kim K's red carpet walk and the Marilyn Monroe dress, we cannot help but keep the conversation going.
Speaker: On that train of thought, Gianna, we are going back to the Met Gala. How you doing? You know, we are moving through the week here. We have Dr. Elizabeth Green visiting Boston this weekend. Ooh, in the house. Love it. Yeah, Alyssa Green in the house. So that's pretty fab. I am going to a Red Sox game tomorrow night.
Speaker: And I am so excited.
Speaker: Yeah, Thieben and I went to, I mean, not a Red Sox game. We went to a local Tulsa Driller's minor league baseball game with $10 tickets. But I was telling Bianca, I just really wanted a pretzel and nachos and a beer. And once I got those things, we left and I'm pretty sure we were there for a total of like, I don't know, like maybe two, three hours or something like that.
Speaker: Yeah, no, I texted Alyssa and I was like, do you guys want to go to a Red Sox game? And she said, do they have hot dogs? And I said, why do you think we're going? Obviously, I'm going for the weekend hot dog. Do you think I care about the Red Sox versus the Houston Astros? No. I do care about hot dog and some Dippin Dots.
Speaker: and yeah totally survive or a funnel cake i personally love funnel cake funnel cake is just prime festival food like funnel cake at an arts festival is no like beyond that i was just gonna say i feel like i didn't get funnel cake at the baseball game because i like exclusively eat funnel cake when i go to arts festivals that is that's totally fair totally fair however
Speaker: in New England, their funnel cake is this thing called fry dough. And Andrew and I discovered it, I suppose, last summer we went to a startling discovery. Last summer when we went to New Hampshire, and like on their beaches, that's one of their like prime beach food items is like fried dough. And
Speaker: so it's basically funnel cake but just like in strips like it's just that's all that funnel cake is however they're like i kind of feel partial to funnel cake so i was like oh man like at this baseball game are they gonna have funnel cake or are they gonna have fried dough because i kind of like the funnel cake that you pull apart and like it's like extra crispy all around you know yeah
Speaker: So we'll see. I know it's really important to me what kind of fried dough options they have. It might not be to other people, but I will report back. No, I think I think we'll all appreciate the recap on the funnel cake fried dough situation. Thank you. So definitely def keep us posted. Oh, yeah. Well, funnel cake choices aside, this has been one crazy week.
Speaker: for myself and for Bianca, I don't know. I don't know about you, but it's been a wild month. So just to let you guys know what's been going on on this side of things, in May of 2022,
Speaker: I, Gianna Martucci Fink, finally got COVID. As you can imagine, the past couple of weeks have been a little bit more interesting, but I'm back to normal. I'm completely fine with being fully vaccinated and doing everything you're supposed to do. It really didn't hit me that hard, but it did put a damper on the past couple of weeks.
Speaker: between work and life and COVID, we decided to give ourselves a little bit of grace, that friendly reminder that we talked about so much with Beatrice Levine last week's episode, and change directions for a bit for today's episode, which I'm actually excited about because Bianca, like COVID, that does not appear to quit, neither does the internet. What a comparison to me. What a comparison.
Speaker: Wowzers. Wowzers. Something that Beatrice said in our interview was cuckoo bananas. Have you been saying that a lot? This week has been cuckoo bananas. Cuckoo bananas. I literally want that to be a ringtone.
Speaker: Like I need Beatrice's like sultry voice coming through at all times and I just loved the way she said it. Like the way it just like came out of her mouth I was like entranced by her and I was like what a fantastic phrase. Also I watched the Selling Sunset reunion hosted by Tan France and he also said bananas. And I was like wow.
Speaker: I love this word because I actively try not to use the word crazy. I like to use the word, this is wild and wildly fascinating. So wild has been more of a replacement word, I suppose, if you will, trying to incorporate that into my vocabulary and move crazy out of my vocabulary.
Speaker: And bananas, I think, is a great word that I want to start using. I just, it's fantastic.
Speaker: Well, completely agree. Great. I don't know, catchphrase? I don't know, but I'm here for it. I've just been saying it a lot. So a trend center. A trend center if I ever knew one. If I ever knew one. So before we get into today's art pop talk, I do believe it is time for a little bit of art news.
Speaker: This art news story is also going to be very on theme for today's episode and it's going to be quick and short. So Shot Sage Blue Maryland recently sold for 195 million in under four minutes of bidding.
Speaker: The purchase, now the most expensive piece from the 20th century to be auction, dethroned the previous record of Jean -Michel Basquiat's 1982 skull painting, untitled, which sold for $110 .5 million in 2017. Wow. So this whole story is just very coincidence. I think not. So just putting that out there.
Speaker: So Warhol created Shot Sage Blue Marilyn two years after the actress's death, one of the five versions he created in 1964. The idea for the different colored portraits stemmed from a promotional photograph Monroe used for the 1953 film Niagara. While Warhol's Shot Sage Blue Marilyn is the most expensive American artwork to ever sell at auction,
Speaker: the overall record goes to Leonardo da Vinci's Salvador Mundi painting, which sold for 450 million in 2017. So I have linked a short article for you guys.
Speaker: by Desert News that kind of highlights more of the auction item which was sold through Christie's and that was just on May 8th. So this is hot news fresh off the press. What are our thoughts? Wait, okay. I'm gonna I gotta pull up the calendar here because I have no sense of what time is any longer.
Speaker: So Monday, May 2nd was the Met Gala. And this sold a week later, basically. Yeah, so I was having a hard time finding info about like, why now? Like why this Maryland? Like was this, did this have intentions of being sold at auction before the Met Gala or was this put on the market after? Right. That's what I'm curious about.
Speaker: Oh, wait, do we know who bought it? No. What did you say? Who bought it? Right now. Do you think Kim bought it? Oh my God, this portrait of me is so good. It's going to be like featured in the background of the Kardashians. Oh my gosh, that would be wild. I kind of like hope that she did. No, I believe it's an unknown bidder right now.
Speaker: That's fascinating. Who has an extra $195 million around? I want to know who this is.
Speaker: person is. Ooh. I mean, this is such a I mean, like I just like, I don't care. I love Warhol's Maryland's and you can't tell me otherwise. No one is trying to convince you otherwise. No, I know. Just like I don't know something about this photo of the artwork handlers like carrying it around through Christie's. It's just
Speaker: It's just iconic. And I'm here for it. I just think the timing is super fascinating, as is all the conversations that have been happening after May 2. So right, I don't know. So um, I think with Art News tying into today's episode, I think that we should just get into it. So yeah, for today's Art Pop Talk.
Speaker: We are diving back into the momentous moment of the 2022 Met Gala, which was Kim Kardashian wearing the infamous Marilyn Monroe dress. She sang Happy Birthday to JFK in.
Speaker: The water is a little frigid, folks, now that the pop culture museums and costume institutions are speaking about the use of this historic garment. So even so, we are highly recommending that you all stay with us through this wildly fascinating conversation on the second appearance of this iconic dress.
Speaker: Before we get into more of our own thoughts and the institutional responses that we have gotten after the gala, Bianca, would you mind giving us just a quick recap of our fresh recap thoughts from Kim K at the Make Gala and what we talked about two episodes past.
Speaker: I love the way you just said met gala. It's my after COVID phlegm is still, you know, really, really going strong. So I don't know, I just can't I can't get enough of
Speaker: Kim K's Met Gala look, it's still very much reeling inside my brain and I'm not mad about it. So two weeks ago, whenever Gianna and I had this discussion on the Met Gala, we both really loved the look. I mean, it's just so incredibly fitting for a person of Kim Kardashian's stature and presence in culture.
Speaker: to be the person to wear this dress and
Speaker: walk the carpet in this way as presenting as Marilyn. And I think Gianna and I were both extremely fascinated by the combination of the two. And it's fascinating because it is so incredibly fitting. There is not one other single person in our world who has the capability of wearing that dress and making it work strictly on a kind of pop cultural and historical level. I mean,
Speaker: In terms of presenting yourself as an icon, that is what Kim Kardashian did wearing this dress at the Met Gala. So if you haven't listened to that episode yet, definitely go back and do so because Gianna and I had a damn good time talking about it. We did have an exquisite time, even though we weren't at the Met Gala, you know, in person. We had our own little, you know, partay on the podcast.
Speaker: Listen to that episode those fresh thoughts. After the Met Gala and the responses that we had there are some things that I think are wildly fascinating. I am going to share some good contextual criticism for us by these institutions but I think before I do that I do want to hone in on the fact that Ripley's was the institution that loaned this dress to Kim Kardashian to wear for the Met Gala.
Speaker: What other stuff does Ripley's have? And it's like, where is this? Now I have like a million more questions. I had no idea it was Ripley's that own history. Yeah. Whereas like the Ripley's Museum. I think it was Orlando, right? She had to go to Florida for this?
Speaker: Seriously, that's so interesting. I'm pretty sure, regardless of the location, I think Robles is a little bit of a cabinet of curiosity. So it is kind of fascinating that this is one of the things in the collection, but they lent it to Kim. So I think there are some interesting perspectives happening when it comes to the criticism that I feel as though even with these institutional
Speaker: responses, I feel like it's still directed at Kim. I feel like there's conversation about these archival practices that are happening, but I don't feel like a lot of people are specifically calling out Ripley's. I feel like they're still calling out Kim. And you guys know how I get uncomfortable when it's like, don't make me come to bat for the
Speaker: the Kardashians, you know what I mean? Don't put me on this side of the political spectrum, celebrity spectrum, but it's like, God damn it, why are you guys putting me in this corner? So I'm not saying that she's not part of the conversation and that obviously she is the person that wore this garment and so there is criticism to be had, but also even from these institutions, it's like,
Speaker: why are we not specifically addressing the fact that like this was a relationship between the celebrity and the institution and at the end of the day those archival practices are coming from the institution not the celebrity who asked to wear it you know that's not her expert expertise like she's gonna try to do whatever she can to wear this dress as is
Speaker: privilege that she holds as a celebrity and we can of course critique that but at the end of the day the expertise is going to come from the archive. Things to think about before we get into it. So again we have gotten a lot of responses from museum platforms speaking about the use of the dress and how they are not in favor of what took place. So let's first look at
Speaker: ICOMS response, which is the International Committee for Museums and Collections of Costume Fashion and Textiles. Established in 1962 and over 400 members of the Costume Committee are museum professionals and costume historians from all over the world committed to studying all aspects of presenting, preserving, and researching and collecting apparel.
Speaker: ICOM costume committee issued the following statement for the public regarding the use of the historic dress that belonged to Marilyn Monroe. Quote, in the light of recent events where a dress that belonged to Marilyn Monroe was used by celebrity in a public event, ICOM costume has been discussing the topic and we would like to share the following discussion. Historic garments should not be worn by anybody, public or private figures. International Council of Museums,
Speaker: ICOM has a code of ethics for museums, which sets minimum professional standards and encourages the recognition of values shared by the international museum community. Although not every museum is a part of ICOM, its rules and suggestions of best practices are recognized and respected by many institutions worldwide.
Speaker: The guidelines that they have indicate that in order to take good care of a piece, it should be handled as little as possible. It should be not washed or cleaned by anyone except a trained conservator. It must be handled with cotton gloves and without any perfume, skincare, or makeup on. And jewelry should not be worn to avoid catching on any loose threads.
Speaker: Costume requires trained personnel for handling and special observations related to light, humidity, and temperature levels should be respected. Also, photographic lighting and photographic flashes must be avoided. Related to conservation, the most important notion is prevention is better than cure. Wrong treatment will destroy an object forever. About this particular situation, the dress that belonged to Marilyn Monroe was custom made by French designer
Speaker: Jean -Louis in the color to match her skin tone. It was sewn on her before she went to the event where she sang Happy Birthday to then US President John F. Kennedy in 1962. She didn't use any underwear to give a more vivid sensation that she was naked. Some considerations about the damage derived from the use a week ago. The difference between sizes of Marilyn and the new wearer gave differences in fitting strain
Speaker: so it can be inferred that the textile was under intense stress on the use. The material is soufflé silk, which is no longer available, so it's irreplaceable. Although the dress belongs to a private collection, the heritage must be understood as belonging to humanity, regardless of which institution has custody of the property.
Speaker: As museum professionals, we strongly recommend all museums to avoid lending historic garments to be worn as they are artifacts of the material culture of its time, and they must be kept preserved for future generations. So, Bianca, before I continue, do you have any thoughts? Well, I think I'm going to, as you're going to continue, I think I'm going to have thoughts
Speaker: ranging from all sides. But to these points in particular, I think that what the Costume Committee has done in this statement is prepared something and put a really coherent understanding of the value of the object into words. And I do have to credit them for that. I think
Speaker: You know, it's not a particularly long statement, but I think that they did a great job at adding a really important key context. Like I had no idea the material is souffle silk, which is no longer available. So in terms of any type of reconstruction that might be done on the garment, it's irreplaceable. That might be impossible to get it back to its original state should something, you know, horrible happen to it.
Speaker: I also really do appreciate this quote at the end, although the dress belongs to a private collection, the heritage must be understood as belonging to humanity, regardless of which institution has custody of the property. I mean, as much as I like this statement, I think that is pretty loaded in a broader sense for how the art world navigates objects.
Speaker: I'm really trying to hone in on the specific object at hand because there's a lot to be said about the treatment of
Speaker: objects in private collections, you know, like we've talked about, you know, objects that just exist as basically tax documents, you know, they are in tax loopholes in terms of physical location and are, you know, never to be seen again, potentially, who knows what type of
Speaker: air quality or conditions out there existing in. Right. And we've been pretty critical in the past about private artworks being on display in homes and not being cognizant about temperature, atmosphere, light in which these privileged and particular celebrities in our episode have displayed art. And it's interesting because I agree with
Speaker: with this statement, like it belongs to a private collection, but I love this. The heritage must be understood as belonging to humanity. I just, that's not the case for different types of art objects that exist in other private collections. And I've worked for private collectors whose objects are just like strewn about willy -nilly in their home and they're handled in the worst way possible.
Speaker: There's not much you can do about it. I mean, advocacy is great. And I think this statement is very, very well put together in that sense in terms of advocacy and understanding of the importance of the object and how it's taken care of.
Speaker: It's really difficult because obviously I am here for preservation of history and material culture. And it's difficult because I don't disagree. And I think as we'll get into this conversation, I just think I more stand in the middle because I think the choice of material culture is a really fascinating, I don't know, context to kind of put this conversation into.
Speaker: because I think this idea of wearing this dress at the Met Gala, why can't I say that? Why can't you say that? I don't know. What's wrong with me? I'm just like stumbling in today. This word material culture, this phrase ties in really well to what the Met Gala is. And to say that we need to preserve the artifact for material culture,
Speaker: is interesting, but the use of this material garment for living history is also very interesting. So although, again, I understand that most of the criticism comes from not practicing archival and preservation practices, I still cannot deny the fact of
Speaker: of the privilege that we were granted to be able to see this dress in action, even though I'm not arguing that it might not have been archival. So I do think this is really interesting kind of getting into some more criticism. Although Kim Kardashian wore the dress only for the museum's red carpet portion of the gala, she changed into a replica once inside.
Speaker: So, conservators, including the former head of the Met's Fashion Conservation Department, Sarah Scarturo,
Speaker: really was not on board with the socialite's choice in costume. Quote, when I was the head of the Costume Institute's conservation lab, I had to swat off requests by people including Anna Wintour, I thought that was interesting, to have irreplaceable objects in the collection be worn by models and celebrities, said Sarah.
Speaker: So I also think the public especially started asking questions or getting critical when the story following them met Gala was
Speaker: publicized from BuzzFeed which reported the behind -the -scenes footage of Kim trying on the outfit. In this footage she talked about how you know she wasn't really fitting into the dress. It showed that she wasn't fitting into the dress. She talked about
Speaker: If I lose weight, how much time do I have to see if I can still wear this dress and fit into it? Most importantly, it showed the handling of the garment by the workers trying to get Kim and the dress, which people were very concerned about just that environment and the way that it looked. I think I have thoughts about this moment and expanding it to celebrity culture at large.
Speaker: because I don't know what is going through your head but I have some examples in terms of I think again the criticism that we're placing on Kim for this moment that isn't an isolated incident from these other things that are happening. So I'd like to preface that if this moment needs to be a catalyst for us to talk about
Speaker: archival practices in terms of fashion, I'm on board for that. But we need to understand why we are specifically mad about this moment when it's been happening a lot in other situations. And I will give you guys some examples. Jenna, that's a fantastic point. And I'm really excited for you to to dive into that.
Speaker: When you were talking about Anna Wintour, I also just had to say the video of Anna Wintour getting asked to show her ID. Oh my god, she was living for it. I don't carry ID.
Speaker: in a winter show me your idea could you maybe just like take your sunglasses off for like one second oh my gosh i can't the funniest thing i've ever seen um i i think that this is just really interesting there are so many fantastic like i'm gonna call them like key witness it you know i witness the cow um you know i feel comfortable using art history jargon every day um
Speaker: I think that Sarah Scarturo from the Met, I'm really interested to hear her thoughts, especially given the fact that they have had to reject requests in the past. However, again, she works for the Met and that is probably a best practice for the Met and not a best practice clearly from
Speaker: Ripley's, which is the institute that we know provided the dress. And back to what the costume committee said as well, it's not like the costume committee has control over
Speaker: what happens with any type of costume from around the world, but here they are again offering some insight on best practices. So I think that's kind of a key point about where the kind of rubbing of conflict lies is there's a lot of really fantastic people who know their shit about archival and costume and fabric practices and they can offer that.
Speaker: But at the end of the day, it wasn't their choice to do so. So, I mean, it seems to me that the Met has obviously an internal policy about, you know, coming from Scartura, what happens with their objects in those requests.
Speaker: that does not seem to be an issue as far as the red carpet goes. You know what I mean? That's not something that doesn't seem like the Met has placed any type of restrictions on what can or cannot be worn on the carpet as long as it's not coming from their collection. Yeah, that's a really interesting thing to think about if they don't want to see certain things or if they want to
Speaker: educate their guests on what is appropriate and not appropriate to wear, which I think is reasonable, especially for a costuming event to talk about what's appropriate and not appropriate. I think that that's fine if you want to set guidelines, like this is your event. Right. And if you want to provide that education and those restrictions for what you think is not only appropriate or historically accurate or archival,
Speaker: then that's your deal. I mean, that's the kind of stuff that I think we all could benefit more from. But I think that is what museums at large need to be doing, is not just thinking about themselves. And I know this is a big money grab for them. This event is a fundraiser. However, there's no harm in it also being educational. You know what I mean? Totally, totally.
Speaker: And to your point, Gianna, as well, this is a very, very specific circumstance. And I'm sure that there have been, as you'll get into a lot of other examples where this has happened, but not under this type of microscope, which is very interesting. Yes. And we can dive into that now, but I also do think it's interesting. I understand that.
Speaker: the Kim Kardashian, Marilyn Monroe dress moment was set up to be the big reveal and the big context of the night. But there were, as we discussed, other people on the red carpet that evening who were wearing other historical garments and also pieces of jewelry. So I also think it's interesting to think about in terms of there's also other discussion about just not even in terms of archival, that it was just disrespectful
Speaker: towards Marilyn, that she should have been the last person and the only person to ever wear that dress. And I think that we can continue to have discussions about that. I'm not saying that I don't disagree with some of what these museum institutions are saying about that. But again, I do not deny the fact that it is a wildly fascinating based on
Speaker: someone of our generation, Kim Kardashian, of her stature, of her Americana to be compared to Marilyn in this
Speaker: pop culture living history way that we discuss in our Met Gala episode. That still stands true. It happened. So we have to talk about what is interesting about it and what we didn't like about it. That was the thing that I did like about it. And I do think seeing that dress in action was a very incredible experience to watch it in action. Yeah. I do think there are some things
Speaker: learning about these archival practices that are wildly fascinating such as I'm sure that there was a lot of intense lighting on this dress because we did get some before and you know after photos of Kim in the dress these kind of shot and staged images before
Speaker: she appeared at the Met Gala. However we do only know what we know right now in terms of what we've seen through this BuzzFeed behind the scenes video and also the staged photograph that we got. It looks like intense lighting because it is Kim Kardashian and I would assume and I think it's fair to assume that there was but also in terms of Photoshop these days
Speaker: you know who knows what those lighting practices or photo editing processes look like. I'm not trying to to disvalue that archival criticism but I think as we always like to say on APT we only know what we know because of what we've been granted access to at this point. I think in terms of her wearing makeup too that does definitely call for concern because we do know the Kardashians love full body makeup and I think that is definitely fair to say that that
Speaker: That is extremely harmful to that material. I think that criticism is definitely important. Fragrances as well. I thought that was super interesting. Kim didn't wear KKW. I don't know. I truly don't know. It's interesting to talk about the lack of respect and disrespect because do we feel this way only because
Speaker: it is a historical garment. And I'd like to talk about this idea of vintage versus historic because we repurpose and people are interested and they collect vintage wear all the time. And there are lots of people who are interested in living a vintage life and make that their persona and they collect those objects and use those objects. There are quite a few
Speaker: vintage wearing people, vintage collectors on TikTok that really make it their persona to live in this experience. And they embody that. And part of that is through the wearing of clothing. So I was really interested to find out that some of these
Speaker: influencers, vintage influencers were really disheartened by this experience and they didn't consume it in the ways that we did for it to be this privilege. They found it very disrespectful towards Marilyn Monroe, which they're entitled to their opinion and thus their lived experience. And again, I am still even
Speaker: Working through my own feelings about it afterwards But I do think it's interesting that we have this idea of disrespect about this dress about this garment and is it only because it is historic because we continue to collect and wear and use vintage attire all the time people of all different statues of and all different types of collectors do this and
Speaker: So I think that's just an interesting thing to kind of throw in the mix when it does come to clothing. I don't know how you feel Bianca. I think at large that speaks to how we think about art objects in general and just the value that we place on different objects. So what we're really speaking to is how famous someone or something is or isn't. Right and to me that's the only reason why this is a disrespectful moment.
Speaker: Exactly. And I understand, I completely understand the cultural value seeing a garment like this would have on popular culture, on museum culture. I completely understand the argument for its preservation. That is why we have museums, because they add long lasting cultural value and history to
Speaker: to us living in modern times. That is the basis for the argument of museums and collecting artwork. So we really have to wrestle with this idea of value. And I think that's what it kind of is boiling down to here because you can find a lovely painting in a thrift store, in an IT store, just like you can a vintage piece of clothing. And
Speaker: you're completely disassociated with for whom the object was for, the amount of time the artist spent on it, who the artist was, where this object lived. I mean, so me just finding it in a thrift store and hanging it above my kitchen counter in a completely unprotected space, it holds value for me, but I'm not going to get this kind of backlash because it's not a piece that
Speaker: is deemed culturally value or monetarily value to the public at large. Nonetheless, it could have taken the same exact skill and time and labor and held the same meaning that another famous work of art does that lives in the Met Museum today.
Speaker: I think that there are holes in this argument, but I understand this perspective. Yeah, completely. Yeah, so I also think another aspect to talk about and which Kim has gotten criticism for is this
Speaker: Physical transformation her losing weight, you know people critiquing this idea that it is just extremely unhealthy to do that and you Shouldn't lose that much weight in that amount of time for this outfit. We only know what we know we I don't
Speaker: entirely know what her weight loss practices are, whether that was healthy or unhealthy, to be honest. I think we just are critiquing the fact that she lost a significant amount of weight in a short time to alter her body to fit this stress. So just want to be more clear and concise about that. I think in terms of her physical transformation, her weight loss, and also conflating this idea with the use of historic or
Speaker: vintage attire, clothing that is significant to a particular time period. I just want to throw this kind of perspective out there as a way to look at the situation because I think in terms of like celebrity culture,
Speaker: where we get these huge film productions and costuming is a huge part of what makes film so great. But we have actors all the time that go through significant physical changes to take on a persona of a character or a historical figure. And I feel like we don't critique that as heavily because it's for art.
Speaker: right? That is their art practice and they are doing this for the sake of art. So are we mad about it because she is doing this doing it for the sake of wearing the dress at the mate gala? Is that not artful enough? Therefore it deems worthy of our criticism.
Speaker: That's so interesting, because when Christian Bale transforms his body a million and one times over again, he gets an Oscar for it. And Jared Leto, y 'all like… It's so fascinating to think about the praise of transformation.
Speaker: in a different movie or stage presence. Or think about like nasty McConaughey or just yeah like a lot of different. Anne Hathaway for Les Mis. I mean and she has talked about how that she doesn't want to or she at the time didn't want to talk about what she did to lose all that weight for the role in Les Mis and she won an Oscar for it and you know
Speaker: It's just an interesting idea of tying back to what we do on Art Pop Talk is, it's okay, we do these things for art, but it's not okay when we just do them in real life. And that's where we get in trouble with the arts about not being internally critical of our own practices. So if we're gonna give like Anne Hathaway an Oscar for her transformation,
Speaker: then we're going to be mad about Kim losing 15 pounds. I don't know. That's not really the hill that I want to die on in this specific incident. I am welcoming of the conversation around body transformation for any of these circumstances. I think it is important conversation to have.
Speaker: At the same time, I am not one who's ever going to be critical of someone transforming their body. I just feel like we only know what we know. And until I know more about that, I feel uncomfortable harping on her for that. Agreed. Yeah. Agreed. Yeah. Totally. Totally. So in this idea of physical transformation, if we're using celebrity culture, film culture, costuming practices in film as a kind of case study, I think it's really interesting
Speaker: in other ways in which we celebrate this happening. So something like Downton Abbey where there has been this exhibition created celebrating these costumes in which fabrics have been altered and made to construct new attire for this film. Also there's a combination of jewels and jewelry and other kind of
Speaker: decoration that's been either created, constructed, or outsourced, or they've gotten on loan. So one of their costume directors on Downton Abbey has talked about how they've been able to acquire some jewels or specifically Chiara's on loan for this, but we don't talk about
Speaker: that disrespectful for these actors to wear these tiaras or wear these jewels but we celebrate them because it is for the sake of art? I know that there was some conversation about jewels worn at the Met Gala as well and I didn't want to go into that too much. I do think it brings up a good idea of tying back to material culture and are we
Speaker: mad about the disrespect towards Marilyn or does it really just go back to this idea of fabric just is in its nature a more sensitive material so we really need to make sure we do everything we do to preserve that because it seems like we don't we don't get as offended when jewels are
Speaker: released and on loan and celebrities wear those a lot. I think same thing for movies but I think this just happens all the time. There are historically accurate objects and artifacts and clothing that movies use all the time and I can't speak to that in depth too much for the sense that we kind of only know what we know and I don't know how on film sets those are
Speaker: handled to a full extent. But again, I just think going back to using this Met Gala moment as a case study, are we only mad about this moment? Or is it going to be a catalyst for us to discuss these other things that happen at large because things are loaned out all the time? And are we only just becoming aware of it now or only want to talk about it now? It's undeniable that
Speaker: Kim being the wearer at this public event uh it's just like inextricably linked to the controversy at hand. I'm curious I guess um if someone else someone else couldn't have pulled this off in the same way but if someone else did wear the dress what type of backlash would that like if Meryl Streep
Speaker: or the dress, what would - Right, would we all come from Errol? I've never seen anyone come from Errol. Right, right. Because it's Kim is why we're getting this, I think, to your point, Jeanna, about there's just so much else that happens. And I think you are spot on with talking about jewels. I think when it comes to the wearing of jewels, of historic jewels,
Speaker: there's this like sense of prestige that comes with it because I think it's a very type of um
Speaker: like movie scenario, like how to lose a guy in 10 days or something like that, you know, where there's like a briefcase and, you know, there's a man, you know, carrying the jewels and it has to be protected at all times and all this kind of thing. But someone gets to wear it nonetheless. Talk about an iconic dress though also and how to lose a guy in 10 days. Man, I love that dress. I mean, truly, truly.
Speaker: So yeah, I think you're completely spot on about jewels. And from an archival standpoint, I don't know the degree to which jewels have an inherent ability to withstand more use and time. And they're obviously just diamonds are one of the hardest elements. Like we understand the material aspects of it. Right, right. So I mean,
Speaker: I guess maybe to wrap up, Gianna, I have a question for you. You mentioned that as soon as Kim left the red carpet, she changed into a replica of the dress for the duration of the party. Do you think that walking the red carpet would have had the same impact in the replica that it did with wearing the actual dress? Could she have theoretically
Speaker: walked the carpet in the replica instead. Yeah, you know, I've been thinking about this so much because it would have given that an exact replica would have given the same obviously aesthetic and moment in the sense to do something that's so visually and historically accurate. But there is something about knowing that it is the real thing.
Speaker: That is fascinating. I think it goes back to the same idea of why did someone spend $195 million at auction for a real Andy Warhol painting when they could just have a spot on Accurate like that is something that can happen today to make something so completely
Speaker: accurate to the original, but we still want the original. That is the driving force, I just think, behind art. And so it's kind of hard to argue that a little bit, then why do we buy original art? Why do we want original art when we can just have the exact copy of it?
Speaker: There's something about that that I still want as a viewer as a person who experienced that moment. Yeah. And I think it's also fascinating given that it's Kim. I mean, there's this sense of just the comparison to her as a reality star as well.
Speaker: like what is real and what is fake. And we've talked about that on the show too. When you go into a museum and you have this, you see a piece that you've always been wanting to see and you have this question like, is this real? Is it real? When you're staring at something that you love so much, we've talked about those moments that we've had. You just cannot believe that you're looking at this. And even watching that through the television, that is simply the experience that I had.
Speaker: you know, again, acknowledging the archival practices to its full extent that took place and didn't take place. That is still the experience that I had. And that is worth talking about. Yeah, for sure. But again, do I still think that this would make a fascinating thesis like 1 ,000%. 1 ,000%. And I think, I don't know, undergraduate thesis in particular,
Speaker: talking about those archival practices because you don't get to do that a lot is just because you're so much having to talk about that content. I think this is just even more of a reason to get into it. And I do appreciate all of the conversation that we've had from
Speaker: something like ICON in these institutions. I think it is particularly important and pertinent for them to chime in and we do need their perspective. But if we get more information about
Speaker: The handling of the garment, stay tuned, we can share all of those things. But as we like to say, this is a wildly fascinating situation. This is cuckoo bananas. This is cuckoo bananas. Oh, that was really good. Oh, thanks.
Speaker: All right, everyone. Well, I think that is all we've got for you today. Make sure to like and share all of our resource images on Instagram and Facebook. And as always, I will have all of the resources for you listed in the show notes for today's episode. And with that, everybody, we will talk to you all next Tuesday. Bye, everyone. Bye.
Speaker: Art Pop Talk's executive producers are me, Bianca Martucci -Vinc. And me, Gianna Martucci -Vinc. Music and sounds are by Josh Turner and photography is by Adrian Turner. And our graphic designer is Sid Hammond.
