• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Kim Kardashian permanently damaged Marilyn Monroe's iconic 'Happy Birthday' dress

SixelAlexiS

SixelAlexiS

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,767
Italy
Definitely blue and black.




p.s. lol at people refusing to believe that a dress can't be a creative/artistic work worth of preservation.
 

Dis

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,023
The problem seems to be that people for some reason feel like blame can only be assigned to one group and the other must be 100% free or blame or something.

Ripleys fucking sucks and shouldn't have loaned it out, they are of course to blame. Kim shouldn't have worn it despite knowing it didn't fit a month in advance after trying it on and in her own words "almost cried" when it didn't fit. Instead she decided that common knowledge about clothes not fitting and being damaged by still trying to make it fit went out the window and she'd try an extreme month long unhealthy weight loss regime to still wear it. Even then it didn't work and she knew it because she couldn't zip up the back on the night. She knew it didn't fit as well and she is also to blame for the damage because she didn't care enough to not wear it.

This isn't a one or the other thing, both sides share blame here. If some private asshole who owns a beloved painting proceeded to loan it out to someone who proceeded to fuck it up then no one would have issues blaming both sides. The problem seems to be that for a lot of people, they can't understand that to designers or people who make these clothes for a living, this is a piece of art for them and they are rightly upset.

excelsiorlef said:
Really weird either or here

The fault can both Ripley's and Kim's believe it or not
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah this is basically the TLDR version of what I was typing haha.
 
excelsiorlef

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,358
Last edited:
Triggerhappytel

Triggerhappytel

Member
Oct 27, 2017
15,122
It's a shame the dress got damaged, Kim K and Ripley's are both to blame and this should have been easily avoided.

That being said I'm more fascinated by people in here claiming the dress is not art and that Monroe was not a historical figure. She's probably one of the most famous and culturally significant people of the 20th Century. She's iconic.
 
excelsiorlef

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,358
ObiWan said:
She was an incredibly gifted actress that only worked for a little over a decade before she died. Especially adept at comedy with some of the best comedies of all time under her belt.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

A lot of folks would benefit from picking up KinoLorber's recent 4k UHD Blu Ray release of Some Like It Hot that's for sure
 
Menome

Menome

"This guy are sick"
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,446
Nephtis_ said:
i dont think you know what a historical figure is
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Hello, degree in History here.

One of the first things we were taught once we started non-compulsory History in sixth form and beyond, is that focusing purely on political leaders and kings & queens is useless when studying and appreciating the past. You need to be aware of everyone at every level, whether by primary or secondary sources, to fully grasp moments in time.

Even if Marilyn Monroe was 'just' an actress, she still intertwined a lot with many people that you would consider 'Historical Figures' and that makes her one as well by default.
 
excelsiorlef

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,358
Zoop said:
Except that that's not the same thing at all. A game cartridge was not designed to be used as a doorstop. The dress was being used for what dresses are used for.

If it was so valuable, it shouldn't have been loaned out. Any time someone wears a piece of clothing, they risk it getting damaged.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The dress was emphatically not used for what it was designed for, which was be worn by Marilyn Monroe
 
excelsiorlef

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,358
jacktuar said:
It's a bit embarrassing but it just adds even more history to the item right? I mean Kim Kardashian herself is an astonishingly successful celebrity. It's not like some scrubber put it on and ripped it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Absolutely not

It adds nothing

Karateka said:
Is someone wiped their behind with the monalisa maybe I'd be. This upset... But this was an accident I think she probably feels bad enough already without the world going on about it
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Ummm she probably doesn't



This woman is so rich she had no fear fucking with Taylor Swift and her reputation
 
SPRidley

SPRidley

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,252
Like i dont give a fuck a bout monroe or fashion and still i understand the cultural significance and artistry of preserving this piece of history in a real museum. And im european so its not like "oh americana is not historical enough"

Ripleys and Kim are both to blame by this situation, ovbiously ripleys more as they can perfectly say no.

some of the replies in this thread are sad and disgusting.

Some of you are the same that probably call for the videogame companies heads when they dont preserve videogames, thats the most ironic part of all.
 
excelsiorlef

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,358
Nephtis_ said:
JFK is a historical figure, Monroe was an actress and sex figure, not a historical at all.
I can see why that moment would be memorable (Monroe and JFK) but I don't see how it's anything more than that.
I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority here too.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

She's one of the biggest most iconic actors and movie stars of all fucking time

She's absolutely historic

Sold for $195 million, Andy Warhol's 'Shot Sage Blue Marilyn' sets new auction record
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

90


www.latimes.com

Sold for $195 million, Andy Warhol’s 'Shot Sage Blue Marilyn' sets new auction record

Andy Warhol’s iconic 'Shot Sage Blue Marilyn,' which sold for $195 million Monday night, is the most expensive 20th century artwork ever bought at auction.
www.latimes.com www.latimes.com
 
Last edited:
Akira86

Akira86

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,613
it's not unseen, the attempts to belittle and detract from Marilyn's historical status, but the amusing part is the moralizing basis that some are attempting to do it under.
All these historical male figures with skeletons in closets plural, probably actual bodies, let alone infidelity and god knows what else. And some people tried to play the homewrecker card lol "oh JFK had a family", lol I'm kind of surprised at folk here.

Marilyn Monroe was a historical figure, a historical sex symbol, she's more on par with Helen of Troy than she is Miley Cyrus, and just because you haven't read about her in your history books (seriously, how?), doesn't mean the students of the future won't be aware of her.
 
Arn

Arn

Prophet of Truth
Member
Oct 28, 2017
5,778
Whilst I'm no Kim Kardashian fan, nor an avid follower of the Met Gala, I can't be the only one to think that it's just a fucking dress.
 
Wackamole

Wackamole

Member
Oct 27, 2017
16,970
I just read somewhere that there was no damage to the dress caused by KK. Is that true?
Seems... weird.
 
Last edited:
Persephone

Persephone

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,506
era incapable of not showing its entire ass when it comes to "girl shit". fashion history is history, Marilyn Monroe is a historical figure even if all you know/care about is her tits, fashion is art, the owner and Kim K ruined an important piece of fashion history and art due to arrogance and pure venal greed
 
boris_feinbrand

boris_feinbrand

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,609
Persephone said:
era incapable of not showing its entire ass when it comes to "girl shit". fashion history is history, Marilyn Monroe is a historical figure even if all you know/care about is her tits, fashion is art, the owner and Kim K ruined an important piece of fashion history and art due to arrogance and pure venal greed
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's not even just fashion. It's sociology, gender history, media history etc etc etc.
Monroe is one of the key figures of American cultural export during her lifetime, shaping and informing gender identities all over the world. And that's before we start talking about the worldwide economic influence she had with her own movies and appearances, as well as advertisment (another very interesting field of historical study).

The problem is, history as being taught in school is based on a scholarly understanding over 100 years out of date. The history of "great MEN". So any other field is seen as insignificant. This inadequate outdated bullshit has and is still creating considerable damage among young and old minds.

Being ignorant of something isn't something to be ashamed of. Insisting on that ignorance however is.
 
MouldyK

MouldyK

Prophet of Truth
Banned
Nov 1, 2017
10,118
alr1ght said:



bKrNWPG.gif
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Yup, can we have a Threadmark?


Kim Kardashian wearing the "Happy Birthday" dress has been hotly contested, but the fact remains that she did not, in any way, damage the garment in the short amount of time it was worn at the Met Gala.

"From the bottom of the Met steps, where Kim got into the dress, to the top where it was returned, the dress was in the same condition it started in," noted Ripley's VP of Publishing and Licensing, Amanda Joiner, who was continuously with the dress the day of the Gala and during transport from Orlando to New York.

A recent social media post asked, "Was it worth it?" Kim Kardashian did not pay Ripley's Believe It or Not! to wear the dress, nor did the company pay her. Rather, Kardashian made a charitable donation to two charities in the greater Orlando area on behalf of the company.

Ripley's Believe It or Not! will continue to exhibit the dress — in as-is condition — at Ripley's Believe It or Not! Hollywood through Fall 2022.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


So...they are taking blame if it looks ruined?
 
Messofanego

Messofanego

Member
Oct 25, 2017
26,399
UK
I'm just wondering if this will cause Mina Le to create a second video on Marilyn Monroe. Her recent one was excellent:
 
Unaha-Closp

Unaha-Closp

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,746
Scotland
That's unfortunate. Seems to have been eminently avoidable I would have thought. Whoever owns it couldn't have cared much about it I suppose, which doesn't seem to track with you having Marilyn Monroes dress in the first place....anyway, I don't actually care all that much but it certainly sucks if you do.
 
King_Britain

King_Britain

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
323
SAINT_ said:


It's a travesty. A historical garment has been ruined.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...




The fact that Kim couldnt even fit into the dress properly and had to wear a fur shawl as her ass was hanging out highlights that she shouldnt have worn it. She had a replica that she wore most of the evening anyway and that actually fit her.

Hopefully this stains Ripley's reputation so that historical items go to places that will actually preserve them.



skynews-marilyn-monroe-kim-kardashian_5758844.jpg
 
MrConbon210

MrConbon210

Member
Oct 31, 2017
7,662
I'm so dumb. This entire time when people were complaining that she was wearing Marilyn's dress, I assumed they meant a replica. Not the actual fucking dress itself.
 
OP
OP
SAINT_

SAINT_

Banned
Oct 4, 2020
460
Mopr3me said:
Well, if the organization that owns the dress says that it was already damanged, who are we to claim otherwise?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
We have a video of them forcefully pulling and stretching the dress over Kim's ass. How can anyone watch that and say no damaged was sustained? This is a 60 year old dress ffs.

They ain't fooling anyone.
 
dstarMDA

dstarMDA

Member
Dec 22, 2017
4,345
Triggerhappytel said:
That being said I'm more fascinated by people in here claiming the dress is not art and that Monroe was not a historical figure. She's probably one of the most famous and culturally significant people of the 20th Century. She's iconic.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This applies in a slightly smaller scale to Kim Kardashian too. Her wearing this dress qualifies as a fashion event, thus probably as art in and of itself.

Is it vain and ego-driven? Yes, but so was the original purpose and usage of this dress.
 
Foot

Foot

Member
Mar 10, 2019
10,999
SAINT_ said:
We have a video of them forcefully pulling and stretching the dress over Kim's ass. How can anyone watch that and say no damaged was sustained? This is a 60 year old dress ffs.

They ain't fooling anyone.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, it's a blatant lie. "From the bottom of the steps to the top, it was in the same condition!" Right, because the damage was done forcing her into it.
 
Panquequera

Panquequera

Member
Feb 8, 2021
1,214
I don't really 100% buy the "Kim K didn't ruin the dress it was already like this", there were before and after pictures unless you are telling me they were excellent done photoshops lol

even then why the fuck would you let her wear it if it was already damaged like that???
 
thecouncil

thecouncil

Member
Oct 29, 2017
12,391
"kim didn't ruin it. we did that ourselves."

had they been wearing it around the office or something?
 
excelsiorlef

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,358
Ripley's statement tells ya who really has the power lol

And it's not the century old artifacts circus company
 
Sam Bridges

Sam Bridges

Member
May 3, 2022
326
RedMercury said:
This is all super interesting but to be fair, I do not think this is common knowledge at all like you make it out to be, though hey I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's very true, depending on your age. Like I said, for people born in the 20th century, most of that is common knowledge, or was. Obviously time did not stop with my generation, and younger generations certainly are not obligated to know everything about her, given that she's been gone for quite some time.

But despite having died decades ago, she's still an iconic and influential person, much the same way Elvis is. Even if you've never seen a movie of hers, she's instantly recognizable; you may not know everything about her, but you still know of her despite not knowing any of her contemporaries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.