Marilyn Monroe’s legendary dress, which she wore when serenading President John F. Kennedy on his birthday in 1962, was worn by Kim Kardashian at the Met Gala 2022.
While some people were taken aback by the reality TV star’s decision to display a piece of history, the majority of people worried that such a move would undoubtedly have a negative impact on something so important in fashion history.
They were correct, since Kim may have done irreversible damages to the garment, according to God Daily Dot. On Monday, the Marilyn Monroe Collection shared before and after photos of the actress’s gown on Instagram.
Despite its age, the garment appears to be in excellent condition in the “before” shot; unfortunately, the ‘after’ photograph reveals considerable damage.
According to The Guardian, photographs taken lately by Scott Fortner, a collector who tries to identify and verify Monroe artifacts, appeared to show stretched and buckled fabric on the back of the dress, as well as missing crystals.
In the caption, they said, ‘In case you missed it, here’s a reminder… Crystals are missing, and some are dangling by a thread.’
The article also includes a previous press release from the dress’s owners, Ripley’s Hollywood, which stated, ‘This piece of pop culture history was preserved with great care.
The garment’s condition was prioritized with the help of garment conservationists, appraisers, and archivists.’ ‘There were to be no adjustments to the dress, and Kim even changed into a copy after the red carpet!’ they continued.
Kim attended the event in early May wearing a $4.8 million crystal-covered nude silk gown. Because she couldn’t close up the back, she donned a white fur stole as an accessory.
During a rehearsal more than a month before the wedding, she realized her hope that the gown would slide on was unrealistic. ‘I wanted to cry when it didn’t fit me because it can’t be changed at all,’ she added.
She then began an ambitious weight-loss program that included a vegetable-centric diet, a lot of walking time, and using a spa suit twice a day in order to fit into the garment.
She made a comment about the procedure, saying, ‘It was a huge undertaking. It was like playing a part, and I was determined to make it work.’ Kim’s exhibition was panned by medical experts, and her clearly obsessive desire to wear a dead woman’s gown was criticized.
Sarah McGonagall, a photographer and costume designer, started a lengthy discussion about fashion survival in response to the pictures. She penned, ‘It’s the equivalent of marching into the Louvre and splattering paint thinner all over the Mona Lisa.
The importance of fashion preservation cannot be overstated. This was the desecration of a priceless historical relic just because of a red carpet walk.’
She went on to say, ‘Museums must follow a rigid code of ethics when dealing with artifacts. Any use that jeopardizes the item’s integrity will be prohibited. However, because Ripley’s is privately held, they are exempt from these laws, which is how sad events like this occur.’
McGonagall also emphasized that this did not occur as a result of Kim’s actions, writing, ‘You don’t have to be shamed Kim to communicate your unhappiness with the situation.
Regardless of who wore it, the dress would have been ruined. Distress can occur simply by handling or hanging the fabric, which is why garment conservation is such a sensitive trade.’