I took this photo some months ago with my mobile phone, hence the size. I live in an area known around Japan for being wealthy, and generally that is reflected in the shops one sees. I rarely enter most of these places, but I do take note now and again of what is on display. Especially when it is a pantsless, and pantsless, mannequin in one of the more expensive shops.
(Some American readers may not understand this last comment, so allow me to clarify: It seems Americans are the only people in the world who call trousers "pants". To everyone else, including the Japanese, "pants" means "underwear", or more specifically in this case, "panties". So you can imagine the giggles I get in the children's classes when I am teaching a lesson about clothes. A similar phenomenon happens in China when you teach the word "gun". I don't know why I told you that. Don't go around saying "gun!" in China.)
If in fact a store worker had been in the process of changing the outfit, that would have been quite understandable. But there was no one near the mannequin, and because I was so perplexed by this I checked again later. Still no pants and no people. I don't know how long the mannequin remained exposed, but it was a good hour or so, at least. Not what one would expect from the usually elegant and high-priced shops in this area. But if I was so quick to take notice, perhaps many others were as well. Maybe it was done on purpose to draw attention? Somewhat difficult for me to imagine, but then again, the store front now has it's picture on the internet. Hurray for free advertising!
By the way, when I showed this to my friends here, they had two responses:
1) Surprise at the apparent negligence of the shop staff, and 2) Suspicion--"What kind of person would take this picture?" What say you?
Posts
3 comments:
i think the digital era is breeding a new form of photographer...the "i may never see this again" type.
i wish i had a digital or a cell phone that took pictures. i still have my "old fashioned" roliei 35mm camera.
i was walking downtown on saturday and i saw a guy rollerblading on ICE AND SNOW. and i thought, "damn, i need a digital".
i totally would of taken a photo of the
"pantsless" one. too funny.
hey tony.
this is my first time reading your blog ...so of course i'm leaving a comment. i wonder if you can guess who i am. we haven't spoken for years, but you received something from me on valentine's day, 2002 (?)
re: "the mannequin's new clothes"
i work at marshall field's as a merchandising supervisor, so i feel qualified to respond.
although in my line of work they are called "forms": the explanation for the PANTS-less female mannequin is most likely (and unfortunately) as banal as you thought: mere negligence.
the merchandiser was interrupted in the middle of dressing her and then forgot about her, moving on to a new project, or going home for the day. so, for a good hour he/she left her naked in the cold like an abandoned lover... indeed-- in the world of women's fashions, the form's existence is a sad and lonely one.
fondest regards /b
I can guess who you are. That valentine made my month. I can't remember if it included a return address, but in such matters I can be as negligent as our merchandiser. So a belated thanks so much goes out to you, my nutty long lost hairy friend. Send me an email ASAP so we can catch up.
You said "banal". Heheh.
Post a Comment