Originally Posted by Emily
The only thing that breaks my heart when looking at these designs, of course, is thinking how much better they would look on plus-size models. We have all been saying this here for years, but now that Crystal did her runway turn, it's a proven fact!
Amazingly, I think the fact that a fuller figure shows off romantic skirts and dresses better than a rail-thin frame is finally being acknowledged.
Until now, the only time that I had ever encountered this idea in the mainstream press was in an article from The Guardian
that was posted on this forum, a few months ago:
But I just stumbled across an article about a designer named Roland Mouret, who made a name for himself dressing an actress named Scarlett Johansen.
Here's the pertinent excerpt from the article:
"Mouret dressed her for the Golden Globes and the Oscars. She looked fabulous, he became a household name.
The key to Johansson's charm is also the key to Mouret's success. Unlike most actresses her age, Johansson is not a size six twiglet: she is voluptuous like an old-fashioned screen goddess. Mouret pioneered the return of the hourglass figure which is currently setting tills alight this autumn."
Now, in any picture I've ever seen of Scarlett Johanson she looks indistinguishable from "most actresses her age" - very, very thin. So it's the typical mixed message. BUT, what I think is important is the idea
conveyed by that passage - ie, that a fuller figure makes an outfit look better than a "twiglet" body.
When women finally realize that gaining
twenty pounds will do more for their appearance, and their ability to wear contemporary fashions, than losing
twenty pounds, that will signal a real shift in the culture.
The complete article is here, although the above quote is the only pertinent part -