Is Paris Hilton the modern day flapper?

[Mojito]

You beat me to it, Laura!

 

[cherry lips]

Mojito, what a wonderful post! It makes me wish you were a fifties fan instead, imagine what you could have taught me then!
Among all of my girlfriends, only one has a natural garconne figure (and I'm popular with girls). If you're born with it, be proud. What upsets me is that a physical type that far from the majority of women's natural bodies, that far from femininity, can become the ideal. And knowing women, most of them will try to conform to the ideal (because they want to feel beautiful, confident, etc). We have the same problem today. I say, if men go for school boy bodies, they should become the lovers of actual school boys! Youths with angular bodies and perfect behinds. (Hm, I want one too! )

 

[Laura Chase]

Mojito, what a wonderful post! It makes me wish you were a fifties fan instead, imagine what you could have taught me then!
Among all of my girlfriends, only one has a natural garconne figure (and I'm popular with girls). If you're born with it, be proud. What upsets me is that a physical type that far from the majority of women's natural bodies, that far from femininity, can become the ideal. And knowing women, most of them will try to conform to the ideal (because they want to feel beautiful, confident, etc). We have the same problem today. I say, if men go for school boy bodies, they should become the lovers of actual school boys! 16 year olds with lean, rectangular bodies and perfect behinds. (Hm, I want one too! )

I think it is quite difficult to say what femininity is. For me, a very thin woman can be just as feminine as a fuller bodied woman. I don't know, I'm just trying not to be normative.

A thin, boyish body becoming the ideal is for me quite understandable - wanting to exercise control over your body by conforming it into an ideal that is quite unnatainable for most women. I agree with you, the majority of women do not have this type of body. But some women do have a naturally boyish figure, and I think it's quite important, in this type of discourse, not to make them feel bad about themselves because their body is not what you or I might call "feminine".

But really, the boyish ideal is something the fashion industry creates, most women I know who aren't as thin as the "ideal" appreciate their curves.

 

[Foofoogal]

I think it is ludicrous that it is 2009 and fashion still tries to dictate what is feminine or lovely.
Men and women like all kinds of different bodies. To me it is like saying only one type of flower is beautiful.

 

[Carlisle Blues]

"Neither do I condemn thee. Go and sin no more."

I like Paris, I love Paris, I simply adore Paris.

However when I think Paris These thoughts come to mind:

They Call It Sin (1932) George Brent: "If you're going to insist on being a jackass, I'm going to turn your case over to a veterinary."

Have a Heart (1934), Una Merkel: "If ya had a brain, I'd brain ya!"

Bringing Up Baby (1938), Cary Grant: "Now it isn't that I don't like you, Paris [sic], because, after all, in moments of quiet, I'm strangely drawn toward you but, well, there haven't been any quiet moments."

Design For Living (1933), said by Miriam Hopkins: "It was certainly good to hear all the names you called me. I haven't heard them since I left father and mother."

 

[Paisley]

Another theory of the etymology of "flapper": the arm movements of the Charleston. If you put your hands loosely in front of your shoulders and then make your elbows go up and down, you look like you are flapping.

 

[Paisley]

Mojito, I say, if men go for school boy bodies, they should become the lovers of actual school boys!

I have a few admirers who would disagree with this.

I call this shape the gymnast shape: lean, athletic and not very prone to sagging.

 

[Mojito]

Another theory of the etymology of "flapper": the arm movements of the Charleston. If you put your hands loosely in front of your shoulders and then make your elbows go up and down, you look like you are flapping.

I think we can safely discount that one, Paisley - the Charleston, although the dance itself has roots that go back to African culture, was not popularised in mainstream culture until 1923 when the song was introduced in the Broadway show Runnin' Wild. The term "flapper" predates that, going back to at least the teens.

Other theories I've heard include the wearing of large bows by young women in the earlier decades of the 20 Century that "flapped" or the wearing of galoshes with the buckle open so they "flapped". Tied to the suggestion I made earlier is the idea that these young women were supposedly awkward - all elbows and so forth - and thus resembled flapping baby birds.

Thanks for your kind words, Cherry Lips. I think it must be awkward in any age for a woman who does not conform to popular body types. My mother - one of the most gorgeous woman (and I say that not just as her daughter) and an extremely tough time reaching youthful maturity in the fifties. She has told me of the torment she was subjected - the teasing she had to endure - to because she was thought to be too skinny (a problem I never had!). She fared better in the 60s when very slim body types came in. I think of young women today who are subjected to ideas of a very low body fat coupled with an emphasis on a larger bust. If one achieves one - the low body fat - it can be difficult to achieve the other without pushup or padded bras or surgical enhancement.

Vogue wrote in October 1928 that "The "ideal" modern figure, from a fashion point of view, will be found to fulfill the acrobat's dream of finess. A rolling body gathers no fat" and goes on to explain that "a really supple and muscular young body, with no spare flesh on the well-made frame, will be neither board-like nor "lumpy". A flat abdomen is the surest guarantee, both of healthy living and of good dressing: if you have got it, you are living right, if you have got it, you may dress well. If you have it not - go get it." The natural figure was not to be entirely suppresed, though: "The hips, too, no longer bulging with evidences of a sedentary maturity, need not be matchboarded to hide their natural curves." Unfortunately many women did have to "matchboard" their hips, as they could not achieve the low body fat with "no spare flesh."

One of Mary's question that I see I didn't address was on the role of Paris as the "final word" in fashion. My response is perhaps a bit tangental, but this is an interesting area in the 20s, when Paris was still generally the trend setter. Fashions in other countries were advertised as the latest styles from Paris, evidently a desirable thing. Chanel knock-offs were available from higher end retailers all the way down to mass produced catalogue styles that spread and popularised her influence. As always, the influence worked more than one way - the large numbers of Russion emigres in the early part of the 20s had a large influence on fashion (many of them founded or worked in French ateliers in a range of capacities from designers through to models), and Chanel introduced some English influenced styles, particularly in sportswear. However, broadly speaking, fashionable western trends were set in Paris.

With notable exceptions! There was a lot of resistance to these ideas, in America for example, where many people claimed that styles as good or better were to found in New York. There was a good deal of ink expended on the idea of "resisting" the fashion "tyranny" of Paris - it was even tied in with patriotic issues, and the idea of refusing to put money into French coffers, or accepting styles supposedly foisted on other countries.

When Paul Poiret advocated a return to longer skirts in 1922, it was resisted furiously by some flappers, who had been wearing their skirts even shorter than was dictated by Parisian style. The Flapper magazine declared that rebelling flappers had "hurled the gauntlet in the face of the Parisian dictators of style and declared that from now on they are going to use their own minds in the matters of dress." Poiret, it should be noted, did believe that short skirts would return in the second half of the decade, and turned out to be correct.

There was a similar feeling in some quarters at the end of the decade, when some women were horrified at the thought of returning to longer hem lengths and giving up the freedom of the loose chemise style. Again, people recorded resentment at Paris dictating what they should have to wear. The Parisians designers, lead by Jean Patou, succeeded in raising the waistline and lowering the hem.

 

[cherry lips]

Among all of my girlfriends, only one has a natural garconne figure (and I'm popular with girls). If you're born with it, be proud.

I think I'd better quote myself before every garconne gal, and every garconne gal fetischist, starts hating me! My idea of the garconne body type is not only slender with a flat chest, it's also no belly, no bottom - the kind of body that makes any dress look 20s. I said be proud if you have it, but if you don't, keep in mind that it's very rare, no matter what the beauty ideal may be. Laura Chase, I'm not being normative just because I dare to use the word feminine, I question everything (and live as I teach!).

 

[Laura Chase]

I think I'd better quote myself before every garconne gal, and every garconne gal fetischist, starts hating me!

Nobody would ever hate you, doll.

 

[cherry lips]

Nobody would ever hate you, doll.

Thank you sweetheart. Sometimes I'm not so sure of that...

 

[Wil Tam]

<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/k4WDjuiQmxA&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/k4WDjuiQmxA&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object>​

 

[Laura Chase]

Just to let you know that Joshua Zeitz' book Flapper is excellent and reading it has only strengthened my thesis about Paris Hilton and her like being the modern day flappers. lol

 

[lagunie]

I think your premies was interesting (Paris Hilton the new flapper) but not applicable because of the difference in attitudes of the 20s and the 90s and whatever we are calling this new decade. The 20s could tolerate bare knees, short hair and drinking and a demand for equality, but can that be compared to a 'celebrity' today to appears in porno videos and exposes her crotch when she steps out of a car? That's way beyond bare knees. People weren't any less ignorant of the realities of life then than they are now but the restraints of society have vanished and what someone like Paris Hilton does isn't rebellion because there is almost no moral walls left to rebel against. She is just pandering to a media starving for someone willing to be exposed the way she is. There is a lot of TV talk show time and magazine pages to be filled - with something. Flappers were creating a life style, Paris Hilton is just a reflection of today's no standards. That's not creativity, it's exposure.

By the way, hasn't someone else taken her place by now?

 

[Laura Chase]

lagunie, I respectfully disagree. I view this with a dash of cultural relativity and I equivalate. I do not claim that Paris Hilton = Zelda Fitzgerald. I'm suggesting that Paris Hilton is our contemporary the equivalent to the 20's flapper.

You write that

"The 20s could tolerate bare knees, short hair and drinking and a demand for equality, but can that be compared to a 'celebrity' today to appears in porno videos and exposes her crotch when she steps out of a car? That's way beyond bare knees."

Yes, I think it can be compared, considering the media picture today vs. the media picture in the 20's. There's a world of difference and boundaries have been pushed somewhat, to put it mildly.

Oh, and some of the flapper girls did much wilder things than just showing knees, bobbing their hair and drinking, for example throwing up in cabs (see Mojito's post a few pages back about Lois Long, Zeitz has this anecdote on p. 91 in Flapper), going on insane gin-binges, taking cocaine, stealing, indirectly prostituting themselves in order to have a good time and get nice clothes etc.

People weren't any less ignorant of the realities of life then than they are now but the restraints of society have vanished and what someone like Paris Hilton does isn't rebellion because there is almost no moral walls left to rebel against. She is just pandering to a media starving for someone willing to be exposed the way she is.

This, we can discuss. I agree that there are fewer boundaries to be pushed today. However, I do think someone like Paris Hilton has an important role to play when it comes to the next generation of feminism. Some of the criticism she is met with is very similar to the criticism the flappers met from feminists. I think there is an important step to be made: that women can be both superficial, promiscuous, flirtatious, act stupid, be blonde ect. and STILL be intelligent and earn their own money.

Furthermore, I would say that the Fitzgeralds, judging from Zeitz' book, sure did spin the media wheel just as much as Paris Hilton does. lol

Flappers were creating a life style, Paris Hilton is just a reflection of today's no standards. That's not creativity, it's exposure.

Again, I disagree, the "flappers" weren't programmatically creating a lifestyle. It was no intellectual movement or revolution. It gained huge significance and affected many important areas of society, but this was not consciously and programatically intended as a revolution in order to create a new lifestyle by the young girls who made up the "flapper" phenomenon, the 17-year old Janes and Myras from Boston and Kentucky suburbs. It did create a new life style, it got enormous significance, but this was definitely not programmatic.

Certain individuals might have viewed it this way, perhaps Scott Fitzgerald, and in this respect, Louise Brooks was very special and according to Zeitz, quite intellectual, "she passed the time between takes with a dog-eared volume of Schopenhauer" (Zeitz: Flapper, p. 246).

Whether it was programmatic to them, I cannot say, but I do believe that Louise Brooks was the way she was because she wanted to be. She took matters into her own hands and created her self. Self made. In my opinion, Paris Hilton is self made in the strongest sense possible. She took her Hilton fortune and turned it into an even greater fortune by spinning the media wheel the right way (or finding the right people to do this for her, or whatever) and thus turning herself into an icon and a brand. She could have sat on her butt and just spent her inheritance. Now, to me, that's girl power. But really, I don't know much about Hilton, I'm pointing out these things and there are 1000 of other similarities. But let's not turn it into a thread about Hilton. I just used her as an example.

By the way, hasn't someone else taken her place by now?

Sure, and who ever that is, they might be the modern day flapper too.