AllisonAdler Posted March 18, 2009 Author Share Posted March 18, 2009 Doesn't look legit. Never seen Page wear this is any of the 1000's of photos I've seen. It's the Victoria and Albert Museum, for goodness' sake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hotplant Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 Kinda silly if he never even wore it. Good thing admission is free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilith Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 If you look carefully, it appears that the jacket is a slightly different colour to the trousers - the jacket is a creamy, ivory colour, whilst the trousers are whiter. That suggests to me that perhaps the trousers have been worn (and subsequently cleaned/washed) whereas the jacket has languished in storage for many years and has yellowed slightly with age. Just a theory! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longdistancewinner Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 If you look carefully, it appears that the jacket is a slightly different colour to the trousers - the jacket is a creamy, ivory colour, whilst the trousers are whiter. That suggests to me that perhaps the trousers have been worn (and subsequently cleaned/washed) whereas the jacket has languished in storage for many years and has yellowed slightly with age. Just a theory! Could make sense. He didn't always wear the entire suit on stage. He seemed to wear different jackets - usually paired with white trousers. It's possible he wore the trousers, but not the jacket. I suppose donating just trousers wouldn't make for such an exciting display. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonmaid Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 Could make sense. He didn't always wear the entire suit on stage. He seemed to wear different jackets - usually paired with white trousers. It's possible he wore the trousers, but not the jacket. I suppose donating just trousers wouldn't make for such an exciting display. Complete speculation on my part, but it's possible that the company that made Jimmy's suits made this and it wasn't worn. At least the jacket part. Like you said, he could've worn the trousers. But the speculation part stems from the fact that John Paul Jones' "Christmas Tree" jacket was, if I'm not mistaken, originally made for Jimmy. He didn't want it, so JPJ took it. I'm thinking that the company just made random suits for Jimmy, whether he asked for/designed them or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jabe Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 Could make sense. He didn't always wear the entire suit on stage. He seemed to wear different jackets - usually paired with white trousers. It's possible he wore the trousers, but not the jacket. I suppose donating just trousers wouldn't make for such an exciting display. If Madame Tussauds had the trousers,then created their art ,it might make for a somewhat exciting display. Picture a shirtless Jimmy,covered in beads of sweat,with his Les Paul strapped on,head angled to one side,where you know he's in the zone,with a slightly smoked filtered cig firmly in his lips. Naw..never mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonmaid Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 If Madame Tussauds had the trousers,then created their art ,it might make for a somewhat exciting display. Picture a shirtless Jimmy,covered in beads of sweat,with his Les Paul strapped on,head angled to one side,where you know he's in the zone,with a slightly smoked filtered cig firmly in his lips. Naw..never mind. Okay, I'm gonna give you my phone number, and every night, as I'm lying in bed, you whisper-ever so sensuously-what you just wrote...deal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longdistancewinner Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 Complete speculation on my part, but it's possible that the company that made Jimmy's suits made this and it wasn't worn. At least the jacket part. Like you said, he could've worn the trousers. But the speculation part stems from the fact that John Paul Jones' "Christmas Tree" jacket was, if I'm not mistaken, originally made for Jimmy. He didn't want it, so JPJ took it. I'm thinking that the company just made random suits for Jimmy, whether he asked for/designed them or not. I didn't know that. No wonder Jimmy passed it on to Jonesy Jimmy didn't wear much of a 'uniform' - at least, not consistantly - until '75, so really, anytime before that would just be lost on a non-Zeppelin fan. I mean I'm not a die-hard Jagger/Stones fan, but that spendex jumpsuit thingy is something he could've worn - even if I've never seen him in it. The suit that represents Jimmy is not a 'Jimmy' suit. It's neither the dragon suit nor the poppy suit, so it seems a weird choice to use in Jimmy's name. But, obviously, I'm assuming he must have had some connection with it in the past, otherwise they wouldn't have gotten it. They don't randomly use a vintage suit and decide to give it an equally random owner. Do they? However, my feeling is that the trousers were possible used regularly and the jacket - maybe not so much. I have over 1400 pictures in my personal collection and I've never seen him wear it. Though, it shouldn't be discounted simply because we've never seen it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jabe Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 Okay, I'm gonna give you my phone number, and every night, as I'm lying in bed, you whisper-ever so sensuously-what you just wrote...deal? Oh my Moonmaid!Thanks for your intoxicating reply. I guess the image of Jimmy I described strikes most of us guys as well,"cool." For some of you fine gals,the mercury must elevate to a "warmer" level. Lucky Jimmy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knebby Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 It's the Victoria and Albert Museum, for goodness' sake. Absolutely. I'm thinking there are some pics of Jimmy OFFSTAGE I can see in my minds eye where this suit could be what he's wearing. Hmmm. Off to look. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knebby Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 (edited) Ok well this was the series of pics I was thinking of and clearly that's a different suit - but it does serve to remind us that Jimmy did have other clothes not so instantly recognisable as the dragon/poppy suits that he wore off and, now and again, onstage - like here:- Its ludicrous to suggest that the suit isn't legit at an exhibition of this calibre. My first thought was what a pity he hadn't loaned them a more iconic outfit from his career, but anyone who knows Jimmy's interests knows that embroidered pattern is totally his taste, and I am actually now feeling that its pretty cool that we get to see it in this kind of detail for probably the first time. *EDIT* - though I do understand, having read the original link again, that clarification of where exactly he wore this suit ONSTAGE would be appropriate. Edited March 19, 2009 by Knebby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninelives Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 Ok well this was the series of pics I was thinking of and clearly that's a different suit - but it does serve to remind us that Jimmy did have other clothes not so instantly recognisable as the dragon/poppy suits that he wore off and, now and again, onstage - like here:- Its ludicrous to suggest that the suit isn't legit at an exhibition of this calibre. My first thought was what a pity he hadn't loaned them a more iconic outfit from his career, but anyone who knows Jimmy's interests knows that embroidered pattern is totally his taste, and I am actually now feeling that its pretty cool that we get to see it in this kind of detail for probably the first time. *EDIT* - though I do understand, having read the original link again, that clarification of where exactly he wore this suit ONSTAGE would be appropriate. Good point - hadn't thought of it that way As an aside, never saw the bottom photo before so thanks for that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllisonAdler Posted March 19, 2009 Author Share Posted March 19, 2009 As an aside, never saw the bottom photo before so thanks for that Me either! Thanks kb! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nech Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 (edited) First of all, the suit is totally legit , on loan to the museum from Jimmy himself. Second, the patterns are not embroidered, but rather painted on Lastly, some pics from the exhibit via FBO... enjoy. Edited March 23, 2009 by Nech Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nech Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 A couple more shots of the suit... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rover Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 Looks more like an Elvis suit doesn't it? 'Cept for the design. Elvis... I was thinking Barry Manilow ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knebby Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 First of all, the suit is totally legit , on loan to the museum from Jimmy himself. Second, the patterns are not embroidered, but rather painted on Lastly, some pics from the exhibit via FBO... enjoy. Nice but that is clearly not that jacket he is wearing in the pic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nech Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 YEah, I've yet to get the story on this particular jacket. I've scrolled thru thousands of my gathered pics and have seen nothing that resembles it. Heh, maybe he just wore it around the house as a smoking jacket! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilith Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 It occurs to me that being painted rather than embroidered, it wouldn't be particularly suitable for wearing on stage ... I imagine that the guitar strap rubbing against the paint on the back on the jacket would ruin it! I wonder if that's why no-one (as yet) has any recollection of it being worn in public - perhaps it was never intended to be? Just my idle musings ... ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knebby Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 Understandable musings, Lilith - in fact I think they have been expressed in this thread in other ways. But I still don't get how it can be claimed to be an outfit worn onstage by Jimmy. Though maybe they are just going by the trousers. In some of the pics of the white embroidered suit onstage , the trousers are embroidered - in some they aren't. Perhaps these are the trousers he switched with. Which would be a bit of a cheek (pun intended, but could have lived without it). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longdistancewinner Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 It occurs to me that being painted rather than embroidered, it wouldn't be particularly suitable for wearing on stage ... I imagine that the guitar strap rubbing against the paint on the back on the jacket would ruin it! I wonder if that's why no-one (as yet) has any recollection of it being worn in public - perhaps it was never intended to be? Just my idle musings ... ! I understand what you're saying, but, to me, if it wasn't intended to be worn in public, I don't see why would it be donated under the guise that it was. I think it's a rather odd thing to showcase, especially if it wasn't a typical 'Jimmy' suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninelives Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 I understand what you're saying, but, to me, if it wasn't intended to be worn in public, I don't see why would it be donated under the guise that it was. I think it's a rather odd thing to showcase, especially if it wasn't a typical 'Jimmy' suit. I thought so too at first but now that I've pondered it a bit, the fact it isn't typical in a way makes it kind of cool - seeing something different if you get what I mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlanetPage Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 First of all, the suit is totally legit , on loan to the museum from Jimmy himself. Lastly, some pics from the exhibit via FBO... enjoy. Here is what color he wore in 1975 (fan's comment confirms his on-stage choice of color BLACK, and I was referring to these comments earlier in my posts... That's from L.A. 6-23-77. A fan named Irene gave it to Jimmy and he wore it for the encores that night. She wrote about it here: http://www.ledzeppelin.com/show/june-23-1977 (Click on the 'comment' by Irene) "I made Jimmy Page a jacket and took it to the Forum and gave it to the General Manager. I made a black jacket because he usually wore black. This year he switched to white. I attached a letter stating that I had tickets for the 6/23 show. The concert was fantastic and I really enjoyed the show. When they came out for the encore Jimmy Page had my black jacket on! He walked all around the stage and turned around to show off the back. I almost fainted and my group of friends went crazy, I was a celebrity in my group of friends. I will never forget that moment as long as I live. Just to think that he would do that was awesome. To this day when I tell people about it they are amazed also." ....Perhaps the Loaned Suit is tailored in '75 and Jimmy experimented with it, and he chose to remain attired in Black....(I have seen all of his photographs, like many fans here, of '77 and '75 era....this suit looks like never left the closet, Worn by Jimmy as in "try-out"... The '77 suit drove me crazy enough :wub: and now this has a story of its own....Oh Jimmy!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longdistancewinner Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 I thought so too at first but now that I've pondered it a bit, the fact it isn't typical in a way makes it kind of cool - seeing something different if you get what I mean. I definately get you. A few years back I had the exact same thing when I saw a very unlikely dress supposed to have belonged to Stevie Nicks. Now, I'm a massive Stevie fan, and I'd never seen it before. And I still haven't seen any photographic evidence of that dress ever being worn by her. It's something different, no doubt, but I can't deny that I was a little disappointed when I saw the supposed Stevie dress, and not the ones I'd always known her to wear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninelives Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 I definately get you. A few years back I had the exact same thing when I saw a very unlikely dress supposed to have belonged to Stevie Nicks. Now, I'm a massive Stevie fan, and I'd never seen it before. And I still haven't seen any photographic evidence of that dress ever being worn by her. It's something different, no doubt, but I can't deny that I was a little disappointed when I saw the supposed Stevie dress, and not the ones I'd always known her to wear. I hear what you're saying. Maybe somewhere a photo will surface where we'll have some proof. Any explanation ever given as to why Stevie donated that particular dress? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.