Coco Chanel
(midwest.social)
𝓜𝓲𝓪
ComicsSince Adam didn't sign it, source - https://x.com/adamtotscomix/status/1992274862749233635
I love how the Goth barista was so popular she became a recurring character
I've only ever seen her working at WcDonald's. Is she a barista, too?
I'm missing something. What did number 26 do to deserve that?
wcdonalds workers are baristas when it's coffee time
They both seem lovely and fuck Coco Chanel.
But also, why is the girl on the left wearing a lamp-shade for a skirt?
Haute Couture.
Fashion. If the furniture can wear it, so can you.
JD Vance has a fashion line now?
Louis Futon
Yeah, the Couch y Cuchi. It's a very.. intimate affair.
Cause it's easier to hide a gun holster in than a regular skirt
Maybe everyone should be barred from owning a business. Like, let's end the present state of things. Just don't make it dependent on cultural/racial categories lol
Also this comic doesn't prescribe a stance on Chanel's beliefs. That's funny.
The comic does, you're only missing the very clear subtext here because you don't have the context for the joke.
As a fashion designer, Coco Chanel's perspective on accessorizing is, to paraphrase, "look at yourself in the mirror before you go out and pick an accessory to take off and leave at home."
The fact that they're being encouraged to disregard a Nazi fashionista's signature accessory advice and to be "extra" instead is a very clear rejection of Chanel's beliefs.
Media literacy award goes to you.
Edit: I mean this in a mocking way, don't take this as a concession, don't upvote it when agreeing in serious
You shouldn't be snarky to someone when they had to explain the joke to you
I shouldn't be anything, least of which lectured on a simple set up and punchline based on a popular quote that is probably misattributed anyway. Everyone understood it.
You didn't, you thought the artist didn't have anything to say about Nazis. XD
My point was about ambiguity. I said nothing about the artist's intent.
It isn't ambiguous at all for people who have a clue
As a "concession"? Are you a child?
The comic flippantly disregards Chanel's advice re: accessories based on the premise that because she was a Nazi collaborator her opinions, and those influenced by them, can and should be ignored.
If that is too nuanced for you to be able to determine a stance then there's no hope for you.
i mean, i only kind of like fashion (i just like halloween a little bit a lot too much and also putting outfits together and thrift shopping and going to the discount rack maybe okay) and i've been an art model (not a fashion model except the one time because i'm a teensy bit deformed even though i'm gorgeous), a few of my relatives either are or have been fashion models. also art models. so yeah i'm just now realizing there's charcoals of my bait and tackle and numerous buttholes out there somewhere that's fun. i hope they put them someplace classy, like over the toilet. i just don't know why i didn't bother to keep one for myself. probably the numerous buttholes part. uh i think i might have forgotten one of these thank you damn cat ) anyways my point is this is the first time i heard of Chanel's accessory advice. Now i gotta get me some summer scarves and go all extra thank you for the inspiration my wife will... actually probably kind of like it.
based on the premise that because she was a Nazi collaborator her opinions, and those influenced by them, can and should be ignored
Mao said that I should shit when I need to. Should I now hold my shit in because Mao made crazed mistakes or was emblematic of a movement that was not exactly comfortable to those in the states and most of europe? What a stupid fucking line of reasoning.
If that is too nuanced for you to be able to determine a stance then there’s no hope for you.
Regard the reply to your first paragraph. I made it even more "nuanced", bullshit appeal anyway.
Whether or not you agree with it has nothing to do with the fact that the author's position is pretty clear.
I never said that I agreed or disagreed. How you read any disagreement or agreement into my statement is beyond me and whether or not I agree is not at all a relevant point that needs to be brought up. The author's position is "pretty clear" because the comic is posted in liberal spaces where virtually everyone dislikes Hitler. Social context makes it obvious, but it's not at all strictly obvious from the logic of the joke and hinges mostly on how "you look great" is interpreted. I point that out and people lose their shit because they interpret messages anywhich way they feel is comfortable and when they're not able to categorise a statement, potentially because it is rather neutral but contains structured statements in regards to the content of the post, it just makes it seem hostile to them when it's not in its content.
Damn. Here I was taking you seriously and you go and drop the suggestion that disliking Hitler is an uncertain foundation for discussion and social context.
Have a good one.
disliking Hitler is an uncertain foundation for discussion and social context.
You not been on instagram the last year? Or to Bulgaria?
Dropping this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social-desirability_bias Lemmy apparently ain't committing to earnest engagement over dogpiling lmao
Also this comic doesn't prescribe a stance on Chanel's beliefs. That's funny.
Do you honestly need the comic to explicitly spell out their stance and/or hold your hand through reading between the lines to figure it out yourself? I think this is more of a reading comprehension problem rather than a failure on the artist's part, no offense.
The joke only works if you already know the (admittedly famous) Coco Chanel quote.
It's funnier but it's not required
Does it? I comprehended it just fine without prior knowledge of the quote.
The quote being discussed is not the one in the comic. It's that she Chanel said to take off the last accessory you put on before you go out, basically saying people out too many on. It's still obvious it's against Nazis, in my opinion, but knowing this tells you that they're ignoring her advice because she was wrong about plenty of other things, why should we assume she's right about this?
You can still infer that the Nazi said something similar by looking at their expressions, the way they phrase things, and what they are surprised by.
The blonde is not surprised that the Nazi is quoted as an authority on fashion, but is surprised by the Nazi being a Nazi. The blue-haired person treats the Nazi quote as sufficient evidence to assuage the blonde's doubts.
If anything, you're interpreting this too narrowly. The blonde isn't anxious about the Nazi's opinion, but about the people that will see them at dinner. The comic suggests not just that the Nazi can be disregarded as a Nazi, but that the public perception of fashion is poisoned by Nazi standards and deserves to be defied.
Well it certainly adds dimension to the joke, but I wouldn't say it wholly encompasses it.
I think this is more of a reading comprehension problem rather than a failure on the artist’s part, no offense
It's not. If I was a Nazi, I could post this comic with glee.
Yes it is. Because nazis have very little reading comprehension.
If you think that anyone who is "more" than just a conservative is stupid or at the very least badly read, then boy do I have news for you. You are underestimating how many ultra strategical 4-D chess players exist within the reactionary political scene. You are one Matrix room away from meeting them. I know this because I've made such acquaintances (unfortunately). You are underestimating the mental calculus needed for re-implementing systems of forced labour and expansionist militarism. I personally doubt that 99.5% percent of people could take on someone like Stephen Miller on the level of rhetoric and planning.
What exactly is your point, here? Are you suggesting a comic about gay women and jewelry is by a Nazi? What are you getting at?
And btw, 'collaborator' in this context is usually a negative connotation unless she's talking about a Nazi fashion project.
What exactly is your point, here? Are you suggesting a comic about gay women and jewelry is by a Nazi? What are you getting at?
None, You suggest I ought to positively have one, but I can just say whatever I want. I never said that it was by a Nazi, I was if anything hinting at its ambiguity.
And btw, ‘collaborator’ in this context is usually a negative connotation unless she’s talking about a Nazi fashion project.
That woman wasn't just a collaborator. She was deep in the shit. Also what do you mean by negative, the comic is just stating a plain fact. You make it negative, a Nazi would make it positive.
Someone ”being a collaborator" is a negative phrase, just like being Infamous is being famous for bad things. No one calls someone a collaborator positively. "In collaboration," or "we collaborated" are innocent. "A collaborator," usually an accusation of being complicit in a crime.
Sure bud.
Can you elaborate on the last sentence?
Undervalued comment.
