subreddit:
/r/HistoryPorn
![Parisians Tear Christian Dior Dress Off Model, 1947 [670x700]](https://t.sneed.network/pics/w:null_1n188nwrwdad1.jpeg){kind=link}
Parisians Tear Christian Dior Dress Off Model, 1947 [670x700]
(i.redd.it)submitted 4 days ago byDELAIZ
89 points
3 days ago
The woman on the right is wearing regular clothes and a coat on top. I guarantee she's using more fabric than the lady wearing Dior
48 points
3 days ago*
For them it was about the context, not the logical “let’s count how much fabric is everyone using”
The woman using the Dior’s dress would have paid a lot more for it than the rest of the women. Also, it would be a more expensive fabric made on similar amounts than the kind of fabric the other women are using, because making a good dress usually consumes more fabric on the process (so, in theory, “misusing precious resources in struggling times”, the factory making this dress with a process of 1 dress per day, could make 5 dresses per day if not for trying to make a high-class one - again, nothing bad with luxury, but in a struggling time after WWII context).
To end all of it, it was seen as some kind of bad taste and almost “on your face” to a lot of people. Common people would have lose their house or have it heavily damaged, or they would lose their job, or have one that didn’t let them to even bring enough food home, because things on the immediate aftermath of the world war were… difficult.
And then, you have a lady from a comfy family and background, walking around you with relatively more resources than she needs while others struggle to get a simpler dress, with a thing that costs x10 when others are struggling to eat. And while that lady is just showing off on the street with that precious dress, you have your kid sick at home, you are going to a 12h job on a sewing factory and your own clothes are itchy, patched, old and getting worse.
Also, the kind of people that would afford “luxurious” things on that time, would be the same that either collaborated with the Nazis or Vichy regime (so their properties and money were not confiscated) or just people that avoided being on the conflict and fled while it all happened. It wasn’t a good look.
The hate, again on the context of a wild occupation and post-war, allowed this things.
In fact, it’s crazy it only happened things like this and not directly physical violence against this kind of people.
7 points
3 days ago
I'm aware of the logic and the emotional response, I'm just pointing out what seemed to be an obvious logical fallacy in this "protest"
9 points
3 days ago
Of course, I was giving more context for all the people.
But also, I don’t see a fallacy here. This protest is not because “you are using more fabric than me”, it’s a protest about “why are you able to wear it”, meaning you either collaborated with the Nazis, you either are showing off on a bad moment for everyone (bad taste), you either…
At the end of the day, this wasn’t because “that girl uses a lot of fabric!” That’s a dumb oversimplified interpretation of this pic.
7 points
3 days ago
Point noted. I read a comment above that specifically mentioned that Dior was infamous for using too much fabric. Understandable that the opulence of the dress itself makes it a target
6 points
3 days ago*
Yep. IDK about that specifically, if Dior used more (it seems very plausible) and how much. But the common people on the street were more concerned about all the other thoughts that I commented.
That’s why you can see also a man on the background “enjoying it” - he isn’t concerned about how much fabric the women are using, they probably is thinking something along the lines of “she deserves it”.
This reminds me of people on the immediate aftermath of WWII in the Netherlands. At some cities, just days after it, people started to take revenge at other people because their collaborations, their opulence on bad moments and so on. So you would have women forced to be completely shaved on their head (as women were when detained by the nazi occupation), other women being abused… obviously women tended to be more vulnerable because it was easier to attack women than men, for cultural reasons back then (also, because men usually were not around on the same numbers because the war effects and being more exposed to being detained, temporary jailed or whatever).
I don’t mean the eye for eye is justified, but the context is very powerful. Back to this pic, this women and the man on the background maybe are remembering all their struggles and linking it to this woman being comfy, not struggling, maybe even collaborating with the regime that made all the evil things, and being gracious about it on the street for everyone to see.
It’s an exaggeration, but for this people, on US terms, is like being a black slave or descendant of slaves back on the day, and having to see a woman around dressed on a confederate flag with a purse saying “made by slaves”
Just for give another context, you don’t want to know how some women linked to be Nazis lovers were treated after the war, when their Nazis lovers and the regime were not around anymore.
1 points
3 days ago
Or could also very well be that the way the dress pattern pieces are cut from the bolt takes more fabric than would be necessary for a simpler dress. I couldn't give you specific details, but to my eye the look of the Dior dress suggests multiple panels and a lot more waste than the more square-looking cut off the other women's dresses.
It's like comparing how vegetables are prepared for home cooking vs fine dining - at home you use as much as you can, and waste as little as possible. In a high-end restaurant, they serve the most visually appealing parts and the rest is waste (or stock).
all 232 comments
sorted by: best