If this dress was so damn popular, and sold in such vast numbers that Barbara and Fitz struggled to keep up with orders, then why on earth have I never seen it outside of these photos by John French? Does anyone own it? Do any museums possess it? Does anyone remember owning it? Anybody??
Years ago, in my hardcore Diana Rigg-memorabilia-collecting phase, I noticed and coveted a copy of Woman’s Mirror from 1966 with La Rigg on the front cover. I’ve only seen it this one time, on eBay, and it went way out of my price range. And considering I paid £30 for the Sunday Times magazine which featured John Bates’s designs for Diana, it must have been very steep for me to have not won it.
I mentioned it to Mr Brownwindsor a few weeks back, for some reason I can’t recall. I say mentioned, it may have been more like a moan. Wahhhh, poor me, I want this magazine, blah blah. The only difference now was that I am considerably more interested in the John Bates article it contains, than the Rigg one!
A few days after this, he mentioned having seen some copies of Woman’s Mirror in Snooper’s Paradise in Brighton. Spooky! No sign of the coveted issue (what would be the chances?) but definitely worth having a look in case there might be other interesting articles. So we mooched along on the Bank Holiday Monday. Had a look at some other issues of Woman’s Mirror, Woman’s Realm, Woman, Women!, Womanly, Women’s Troubles….etc etc. Then M noticed there were some more magazines in a glass cabinet. I look up, and there it is. Diana Rigg, with cut-out dotted line. THE issue. All other issues had been £3, surely this would be much more. But no. £3 it was.
I am a very happy lady, and I will be scanning/writing up the John Bates interview in due course.
My most recent Lovefilm rental was a film I’ve been dying to see for years: Two for the Road starring Audrey Hepburn and Albert Finney. I can safely say that it did not disappoint and I remain baffled as to why it wasn’t more successful at the time, or why it hasn’t been re-evaluated as a classic in the years since. I suppose it is mainly a lack of familiarity; when was the last time it was shown on’t’telly?
One reviewer explained the possible contemporary drawback that Audrey Hepburn was a much more established Hollywood star in 1967, and someone like Albert Finney would have seemed a terrible upstart to have equal billing opposite her. It doesn’t help that his character is a dominant, aggressive, opinionated Alpha male, and she is as delicately beautiful and softly spoken as always. That isn’t to say that her character is a washout, far from it, but in analysing a marriage across its entire lifespan, you will certainly see the worst sides of both parties. And the phrase ‘a bit of an arse’ was created precisely for a man like Mark Wallace.
The rhythm of the film is deliciously undulating and swervy, which is dictated by the fact that it is a road movie and that it switches between several different time periods through its entirety. You see how the couple first meet, how they fall in love, how they survive youthful poverty, pregnancy, the changing fortunes of their lives (and how these, perversely, make them unhappier), their dalliances, how they seem to be falling out of love. In fact, it shows every nuance of a complex relationship in snippy vignettes from several holidays, each involving a long journey across France. You never see their home, but you really don’t notice and certainly don’t need to.
It is also notable for Hepburn’s wardrobe, which is provided by a host of swinging young designers (Foale and Tuffin, Mary Quant, Paco Rabanne, Ken Scott etc…) and perfectly places each time period. You know where you are when her hair is long, and her beatnik jumper is red, or when her hair is perfectly coiffed into a Vidal Sassoon cut and her clothes are mod perfection.
You’ll laugh, if you’re anything like me you’ll cry, and you’ll fall ever more in love with Audrey and Albert. There’s even an early Jacqueline Bisset appearance. Definitely a ‘must see’, in my opinion.
I’m not entirely sure where to start with this image, so I’m not going to. The copy doesn’t even really make sense, but it certainly makes me laugh. Poor Diana; that can’t be a comfortable pose for being towed, and she’s surrounded by twerps!
Ludmila Savelyeva. Photographed by Avedon. Vogue, June 1969
Eyeliner, done properly, can be a work of art.
The first I knew of Joanna was when I happened upon the soundtrack LP in a record shop in Norwich. Don’t even get me started on my idiocy in not buying it*. I was transfixed by the front cover, the synopsis and the fact that it has Donald Sutherland in it. Why had I not seen this before? Thankfully, Mr Brownwindsor was on the case and managed to find a copy for my birthday**.
Geneviève Waïte plays the title character (she would later release an album called Romance is on the Rise, and marry John Phillips after he split from Michelle) and the film was written and directed by Michael Sarne, occasional actor, pop singer and ex-husband of Ghost founder Tanya.
To say it’s an odd film, is to say the least. But odd in that perfect, no-need-to-make-sense kind of way that so many late Sixties films are. Better than Candy but probably not as downright amazing as, say, The Jokers or Smashing Time.
Waïte’s clothes were specially designed by Sue West and Virginia Hamilton-Kearse and were then sold through the Paraphernalia boutique in New York. There’s definitely something quirky and unique about them, almost beyond what you expect for the period. They remind me of Foale and Tuffin, Quorum, Betsey Johnson etc, but have more of a homemade and eccentric ‘costume’ feel to them which is a good match for the character of a young art student.
I can see why Waïte never really continued with much in the way of acting, since I suspect that the role of Joanna was really not very far from her own personality. She’s cute, eccentric and ditsy, but with a healthy dose of logic and sense.
As with so many films of this style and era, it’s well worth watching for the exterior shots of London and Joanna throws up a rare treat: the girls take a ‘shopping’ trip to Bus Stop where the rails are soon raided and no money is spent. Utterly brilliant.
I don’t think my screengrabs even begin to do it justice, but I hope they give you a good taste of what you might expect from the film. The outfit changes are relentless, her facial expressions ever-changing, and the locations are stunning. I’ve also captured what I’m fairly sure are uncredited cameos by Suki Poitier and Chrissie Shrimpton. Enjoy!
*I went back two years later and it was still there! This time, dear reader, I bought it…
** It has subsequently been given a gorgeous release by the BFI. Which always seems to happen when we’ve finally found a dodgy copy of something we were desperate to see. Psychic but annoying BFI…
I know nothing of Beyond the Pale other than this photo (scanned from 20th Century Fashion by David Bond). If anyone knows anything, please do let me know. I love this photo; nobody looks quite as good as they probably think they are, but they look all the more amazing for it. And I particularly love the ‘candid’ face of the guy coming out of the door.
Edited to add a scrap of information from the photo agency website:
London, England, 1968, Former psychology student opens London’s latest Boutique, ‘Beyond the Pale’, Seen here are (L-R) Manageress Jo Cruickshank, model Chantey Mulville, owner Peter Woodworth & model Anthe Holt
One of my favourite images, possibly ever.
I can’t even begin to imagine the pain she must have been going through.
I thought she was utterly adorable in Here We Go Round The Mulberry Bush (and On Her Majesty’s Secret Service) and thought I’d post a few stills in tribute. It’s well worth watching, if you haven’t already, although now doubly tinged with sadness (if you don’t know the Barry Evans story, click here).
Petticoat, November 1969
(Probably still applies, but now across the whole of London…trendy or not.)
The brilliant illustration is uncredited, but looks like a Malcolm Bird to me.
Liz Eggleston 
