dagblog - Comments for "Did Twiggy kill Rubens?" http://dagblog.com/link/did-twiggy-kill-rubens-35932 Comments for "Did Twiggy kill Rubens?" en Oh please, can she go away http://dagblog.com/comment/327825#comment-327825 <a id="comment-327825"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/comment/327814#comment-327814">Meanwhile back to thin</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Oh please, can she go away already? So many more interesting faces &amp; presumably bodies.</p> </div></div></div> Tue, 26 Sep 2023 08:16:26 +0000 PeraclesPlease comment 327825 at http://dagblog.com Meanwhile back to thin http://dagblog.com/comment/327814#comment-327814 <a id="comment-327814"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/link/did-twiggy-kill-rubens-35932">Did Twiggy kill Rubens?</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Meanwhile back to thin eyebrows and get rid of all those pain-in-the-neck hair extensions?</p> <p><a href="https://pagesix.com/2023/09/25/kim-kardashian-is-unrecognizable-on-cr-fashion-book-cover-with-buzzcut/">https://pagesix.com/2023/09/25/kim-kardashian-is-unrecognizable-on-cr-fashion-book-cover-with-buzzcut/</a></p> </div></div></div> Mon, 25 Sep 2023 23:30:54 +0000 artappraiser comment 327814 at http://dagblog.com The article is ill-informed http://dagblog.com/comment/327808#comment-327808 <a id="comment-327808"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/link/did-twiggy-kill-rubens-35932">Did Twiggy kill Rubens?</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>The article is ill-informed garbage, really bad</p> <p>As far as favored female body types are concerned, Twiggy and the associated youthquake were simply a freedom alternative against the cinch-waisted full-figured full-skirted Dior postwar post-austerity babe JUST AS (DEJAS VUS ALLOVER AGAIN) 1920's 'flapper' was a freedom alternative post WWI with 'boyish' waist-free figures (including many bound large breasts if they had them) creating an extreme alternative to corseted hourglass figures, all topped with radically cropped hair (gasp! especially shocking! females did not cut their hair! they spent hours a day caring for it!)</p> <p>1920's flappers in turn were DEJAS VUS ALLOVER AGAIN of the new radical slyph-like female body silouhette of the Napoleonic era with tiny breasts above the new 'empire' waistline, discarding the pre-revolution hourglass corsets and huge powdered wigs and heavy silks for very thin fabrics (sometimes wettened to reveal the bud-like bodies even more) with cap sleeves revealing arms and simple hairstyles.</p> <p>The actual heavy muscular and fatty Rubensian ideal was only a western favorite female type for less than a century and never came back (tho monks may have preferred farm girls that way for a longer time period, they were not preferred women of class.) As for before the Baroque period, you have to go a millennia back and to other cultures. That female body type is not favored in western Renaissance, Mannerist or Medieval periods, that's for sure</p> </div></div></div> Mon, 25 Sep 2023 02:19:33 +0000 artappraiser comment 327808 at http://dagblog.com