Oscar night is always huge, a cocktail of chatter about who won what, after parties, whom did she, he, they wear and of course there will always be best and worst dressed lists.
Oscar night has now been and gone and awards season is over. It is fair to say that it was a great month for Natalie Portman and Colin Firth and looks set to be a great year for them both. However the internet, vintage sellers, historians and Twitter are a buzz with talk of only one Oscar dress and that belonged to Colin Firth's wife; Livia Firth.
Pictured above you can see Livia's dress in all its glory. Livia Firth is a eco warrior and fights for all things green by wearing only eco friendly dresses to red carpet events. Livia writes all about it on Vogue.co.uk where she has a blog, read it here. I am sure that is not all she does, but you get the idea.
Gary Harvey is the designer behind Livia's Oscar worthy dress with a little help from 360 degrees vintage. The reason for the buzz and hoop la is that in order for Livia to have one dress, 11 original vintage dresses from "the Kings Speech" era, so 1930s had to be butchered!
"Eleven dresses in one, vintage/thrift/charity shop buys all from the era of The King's Speech. Every part is recycled, repurposed, upcycled." Tweeted Livia, before walking onto the red carpet.
I love vintage and I like her dress, but for 11 vintage dresses from the 1930s to be cut up and turned into something else I cannot help but feel sad. I know there is a mixed feeling about this story, but seriously I am just shocked at the sheer volume of vintage frocks that were destroyed to make this one Oscar dress. Especially when there is so much great vintage available to the red carpet-ratti.
What do you all think? Is this eco, green madness? Am I being too sensitive? Or are we all just praying that the 11 destroyed pieces were so far gone that Livia and Harvey did them a favour?
Ooh, that's a bit much isn't it? I have mixed feelings, at first I thought, oh that's a good idea, but if the vintage dresses she used were like still in perfect condition then I'm not sure I agree.
ReplyDeleteIf they were sort of tattered and irreparable then perhaps fair enough, well done, because that is quite a green thing to do. As for which side of the fence I'll fall on this, probably erring on the side of, 11 dresses have gone to waste...
I think you know my opinion before I even write it!
ReplyDeleteI cannot believe they ruined 11 30s frocks to make one that might only be worn once. In fact it makes me actually angry. There are people out there who would have worn those 30s dresses many times and would have cherished them so to cut up something that could have been worn to make something that will be worn once is sooooo far from green I can't believe she really thinks it IS green!
I think it's a shame that all those one off gowns got ruined :( x
ReplyDeleteWow, this is the first I've heard about it. Eleven dresses seems a bit excessive. Surely she could have picked on and just had it altered? It's more green friendly than wearing a new Armani, but I'm with you, it just doesn't feel right.
ReplyDeleteShe does look very pretty thoug.
The opposite message to what she intended. I give her kudoes to wanting to be green, but in doing so she inadvertantly highlighted a key point of her message: look into the source of the consumable you're using. Now the vintage seller and those who are stung by the accusations of cultural vandalism are trying to downplay the conditions of the gowns (they've gone from being the "best" in stock to having some holes in the netting), but it's no wonder the vintage community is up in arms. Eleven gowns to make ONE is not sustainable. Don't use up finite resources...even if they're manmade 1930s gowns.
ReplyDeleteI think its absolutlty disgusting!
ReplyDeleteNo sweetie, your not sensitive. I feel the same. It's not on... would she have destroyed 11 different Chippendale's to make one Table that would be used just once? No.
ReplyDeleteReally sad.
I think the dress is beautiful!! I know its sad that 11 dresses had to be "destroyed" to make one but who knows maybe the other dresses were ugly or unwanted- no matter she looks stunning!!
ReplyDeleteI think it definitely depends on how they looked before.
ReplyDeleteI had no idea that 11 1930's dresses had to be butchered for the occasion! That's insane! Could she not have worn one of the vintage dresses? Surely that would have been far greener? I'm seriously saddened by this.
ReplyDeleteI knew vintage dresses had been used but I assumed they would of used dresses no longer good to wear. What a waste. I have yet to see a ugly 30s dress, frumpy yes, drab colour yes.
ReplyDelete