| Posted by Bel | The time is 12.17pm here in Wellington NZ |
I get so mad at people who refer to things' time period incorrectly.
EXAMPLES:
- "Ooh, I love your hair, so retro and 70s!" when hair is CLEARLY in a 60s-influenced back-combed bouffant.
- "Great dress, very 1960s looking!" when dress is OBVIOUSLY a tribute to Dior's New Look of the 1940s.
- "I like those T-bar sandals, they look so World War II ish" when T-bar style shoes are a 1920s throwback as EVERYONE SURELY KNOWS.
Just this morning I overheard a colleague on the phone:
"Yeah, they've just opened it, over in Miramar. The cinema's been done up completely. It's all in, um, it's in that, ahh - 1940s, 1950s style. Looks great!"
I was resisting the urge to writhe on the floor howling as this went on, as I knew that this person was referring to the Roxy Cinema.
I will borrow a few gorgeous pics from Alice's Niceties blog to demonstrate just how "1940s, 1950s style" this place is. (NOT AT ALL. IT IS 1930s YOU FOOL. AND HOW COULD SOMETHING BE THE STYLE OF BOTH THE 40s AND THE 50s I ASK YOU?)
COME ON!!!!
Even if the person had never heard of Art Deco, as if they were like "oooh WWII - I know, let's spend lots and lots of money building an extravagant cinema!"
(I sometimes confuse late-60s clothing with early-70s, FYI.)
I might give the Dior admirer a pass rate if they'd said 50s.
Phew- saw the mention of me in my Reader and got super paranoid I'd made a decade faux pas. I think I'm pretty crap at telling what decade (clothing) fashion is from, however I think I'm pretty decent at architecture.