-
The Prince of Madrid
May 14, 2013 | 16 comments
-
French Fears, French Fantasies
April 30, 2013 | 262 comments
-
The Prince of Monte Carlo
April 23, 2013 | 362 comments
-
Winning and Staying Honest in America’s Game
April 1, 2013 | 1 comment
-
The Kenya Syndrome
March 21, 2013 | 13 comments
Buy the Book
Pretty Woman
The most famous name in fashion is infamous for other reasons.
(Page 2 of 2)
Neither Wertheimer nor Thomas, who eventually succeeded him at the head of the Chanel powerhouse, discussed the reasons for the deep-pocket rescue, but Vaughan points out that from a business angle it was reasonable.
Although she halted production during the war and immediate post-war years, Chanel was still the most famous name in fashion. Wertheimer saw that with a fresh injection of capital, he could make more money than he had ever made in the interwar years. Which he did. He needed to keep the brand name clean, however, and despite what she had done to him, he saw no percentage in a legal battle that would publicize Coco’s wartime behavior, of which he knew only too much. He therefore made sure she got the deal she wanted. He probably wanted that for her. For despite what she had done to him, she was still the beautiful Coco Chanel whom Pierre Wertheimer loved.
As my father’s old buddy Irwin Shaw used to say, go figure.
About the Author
Roger Kaplan, a Washington-based writer, covers the Middle East and Africa (and tennis) for The American Spectator.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (25) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Roger Kaplan
More Articles From Buy the Book
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/01/16/pretty-woman
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
ggoblue| 1.16.12 @ 6:57AM
thank you for the very interesting read. the french post war 'civil war' is indeed a bottomless pit of intrigue.
LindaF | 1.16.12 @ 7:31AM
I'm torn - yes, she was a weasely little collaborator, but, what of that? She was also French, and MANY of them did the same, or worse.
She came out of that polluted cesspool - do we expect that she would be pure?
Alice Moore| 1.16.12 @ 9:37AM
LindaF there is no need for Francophobia. In the Nazi/Soviet eras collaboration was the order of the day in much of Europe.
Before you condemn ask yourself what you would do if the US were in a similar situation. It's easy to talk a big game without a gazillion man, foreign, brutal army in your country 24/7. I'm reminded of of a co worker always saying how the American people would have given a Stalin or a Hitler the what for before they could go beyond dog catcher. And, oh yes, they'd be in the Underground Resistance should the Red Army march in. This coming from a person who butt kissed a tin horn shift supervisor. Imagine how this person would treat their neighborhood Block Commandant who could wreak much more havoc on a life than having ONLY a say in termination of employment.
Collaboration is not unique to any nationality. I am not providing any cover or rationalization. The average person is in a triage situation between worse and absolutely worst of all without knowing one from the other.
Richard Baker| 1.16.12 @ 8:02AM
Wonder if she had HER head shaved as a collaborator at the end of WWII? Probably not, I suppose.
Stuart Koehl| 1.16.12 @ 9:09AM
Abwehr was military intelligence, part of the Wehrmacht, and did not answer to Heinrich Himmler, who was Reichsfuhrer der SS, with control over the SS, Gestapo and Sicherheitsdienst. So, in no way could Dinklage have been part "of the chain of command leading up to Himmler, the head of the Nazi secret police, in which Dincklage operated". In fact, the Abwehr and SS were mortal enemies, and, as the war ground on to its conclusion, a great many Abwehr officers ended up either in front of an SS firing squad, or dangling from a meathook (like Abwehr commander Admiral Wilhelm Canaris). During the war, Canaris and a number of Abwehr officers covertly passed on intelligence to the Allies, as part of a concerted effort to bring down Hitler.
Such an elementary error puts into doubt much of the remainder of Vaughn's narrative.
Hal Vaugan| 1.17.12 @ 6:23AM
Mr.Koehl--Read the book and (bit more history, too); see the reproduced documents that prove Dincklage worked fro the Abewehr AND THE GESTAPO--in fact by 1940-1941 Canaris ordered all Abwehr agents to cooperate with the Gestapo!
Hal W. Vaughan
Occam's Tool| 1.17.12 @ 11:11AM
Thanks, Mr. Vaughn.
In the words of the MST3K guys (Agent for HARM): a traitorous Frenchman! Who would've thought it?
Chef Schnauzer| 1.16.12 @ 9:55AM
I hope the book is as well written as the review. Thank you.
Alain| 1.16.12 @ 12:20PM
A very interesting review, Mr. Kaplan, and full of things I hadn't read elsewhere.
However, was it necessary to say "saved her ass"? If you meant "saved her life," why not say so and avoid the lowest-common-denominator vulgarity?
Jan| 1.16.12 @ 12:53PM
I think Kaplan's comment of "saved her ass" is completely appropriate. After all, Coco's ass really got around.
Seek| 1.16.12 @ 1:13PM
The devil wore Prada.
Frog in Fatigues| 1.16.12 @ 5:25PM
Right on, Monsieur Jan! This is an unexpected and tasteless speck of dirt in an otherwise quite interesting article. However, I don't like the uncalled for jab at catholic nuns and their supposed but unproven antisemitism. Who were the many "Justes" who saved jewish asses (see the unpleasant effect? in those days? commies? freemasons? protestants? government employees? Nope. Most of them were either very plain and very humble catholics or priests, friars and nuns. Unless, of course, you buy the very tired canard of a collaborationist church.
Frog in Fatigues| 1.16.12 @ 5:28PM
Damn it. What's wrong with my eyesight? read:(see the unpleasant effect?)
Kingofthenet| 1.16.12 @ 6:16PM
Well she may have been devious, ruthless really ...but she had more class/taste in her little finger than ANY women alive today.
Kingofthenet| 1.16.12 @ 6:50PM
I heard #5 is made from the tears of Jewish Children?
Occam's Tool| 1.17.12 @ 11:12AM
King:
Screw off, jihadist lover.
Ironman| 1.16.12 @ 7:04PM
There are a number of slippages here that mar a column of sensible readers' letters.
Regarding the most silly -- or noxious --, let us be clear right off: Mr. K. is only stating the facts, as reported by the book's author (whom he makes clear is a diligent researcher), so there is no cause to impute one bigotry or another to either reviewer or author. On the contrary, if bigotry there is it may be in the myopic eyes of the beholders. The Catholic Church in 1880-90s France was as fallible as its Lord, I am sure, anticipated. And it takes nothing from the heroism of Christians in later years, notably during the terrible years of World War II -- when they were among the foremost fighters in the Resistances and witnesses against Nazi pagan barbarism, as they were elsewhere in Europe --, to point out the obvious, which is that certain orders and their works were rife with the same awful prejudices that poisoned other sectors of society.
Hey Jew| 1.16.12 @ 7:29PM
Like Eric Cantor (current Majority Whip), the Jew Wertheimer, stabbed his race in the back....for profits.
Isn't that what the 1st Jewish House Majority Whip in the GOP is doing to John Boehner?
Why blame Coco or Boehner and not the Jewish traitors?
Frog in Fatigues| 1.19.12 @ 7:43AM
To "Hey Jew": You stink.
POST American| 1.16.12 @ 9:06PM
---------------------FINAL WORD-----------------------
"By 2000, EUGENICS had shaken
off most of its NAZI baggage--"
-Endgame
(documentary online)
-Only to take up its POST Soviet
and RED Chinese.
Chanel's complicity, whatever the degree,
is NOTHING to the sellout, cover and
TREASON underway right now, in broad
daylight viz a viz Globalism, RED China,
world CON-troll and genocidal stealth
------------------EUGENICS------------------.
Remember kiddies, one and all in the 30's
and even 40's could claim some degree
of genuine ignorance.
WE CANNOT.
You reading this -KNOW-- what's going on
and are doing NOTHING ----that is if you
yourself are not an actual enabler of it.
SINS of omission are insidious.
But the SIN AGAINST KNOWLEDGE, as
you will one day find, has a special place
in hell.
-------------YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED-------------
Otto von Bismarck| 1.16.12 @ 11:51PM
"after the Franco-Prussian War gave France’s Rhineland provinces to the First Reich in 1871"
No. That was the second one. And the provinces were part of Alsace and Lorraine. The Rhineland is further north.
Stefan Stackhouse| 1.17.12 @ 11:35AM
You beat me to it. The first reich was the Holy Roman Empire. (Which, as Voltaire famously said, was neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.)
R Kaplan| 1.17.12 @ 6:59PM
Gentlemen: Thank you, I stand corrected. (And may I add, the "first Reich" and "Rhineland" mistakes are the review's, not the book's.)
Andnier| 1.17.12 @ 1:23AM
Video Converter Ultimate,
dvd to avi converter,
video converter ultimate| 1.17.12 @ 2:01AM
Record Streaming Video,
YouTube Downloader for Mac,