THE TELEGRAPH: From the moment she stepped into the limelight, Michelle Obama was feted as the 'First Lady of Fashion'.
She was hailed as the successor to Jackie Kennedy, with the style press rhapsodising over her ability to carry off High Street buys and glittering designer gowns with equal panache.
One dress, however, has sent ripples through the fashion world for rather different reasons. Mrs Obama's choice of gown for a State dinner has sparked a debate about race and the delicate matter of whether one can call a dress colour 'nude' when it really depends on the wearer.
The dress in question, which Mrs Obama wore to meet Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh at the White House, was described by the designer as a "sterling-silver sequin, abstract floral, nude strapless gown".
That simple description has now caused a stir. "We talk of nude now and there is no one colour. It's politically incorrect," said Gale Epstein, founder of the US lingerie brand Hanky Panky. "There is a wide range for skin tone colours. Human skins tones are a whole colour palette unto themselves." Miss Epstein prefers to use a range of names, from "light chai" to "espresso", to describe her wares.
The Associated Press news agency was compelled to revise its reference to the dress colour from "flesh" to "champagne" after one fashion editor objected, asking: "Whose flesh? Not hers." >>> Anita Singh, Showbusiness Editor | Wednesday, May 19, 2010
