Does Cate Blanchett own a pair of hotpants?

Elegant women don't wear hotpants...nor do those of us with realistic proportions.

BTW Kylie, I know you follow this site religiously, but when you come round will you bring Dannii with you? Thanks.

Piglet, they do but they don't show

BTW, whatever happened to Jane from Neighbours (you know, Mrs Mangle's gdaughter)? Kylie, can you bring her too?

Tee hee. I don't even want to see myself in hotpants though.

Oh yeah, and Melissa (Todd's girlfriend before he cheated on her and went with Cody). Drag her along too.

Don't remember a Melissa.

Jane was Annie Jones in real life and she has just been in a series here where she plays the mum of a guy in his 20s, so not sure you want her anymore - might be a bit old. Will send Dannii, Cate and Kylie though.

Now Danni is filth. And she has had so much surgery and botox, Sylvester you wouldn't want her honestly.

sorry but who gives a damn about K.M.'s hotpants? Museums should not do this crap. They should show important things, like paintings by VanGogh or pharao's combs. KM is not a historically important person. her name will be forgotten in 30 years or earlier. She is not comparable to Andy Warhol. She has no brain and is a former soap opera star/singer. Nobody of a worldwide relevance.

There should be an exhibit in V&A about the destruction of the Amazon rainforest. Then Tony Blair should invite high profile politicians from Brazil. But he'll probably be too busy to visit KM's hotpants..

yep he would be very busy indeed. After all, they don't need "thinking" public, they want "happy on hotpants" public.

Otto seemingly quite a large number of the British public care about Kylies’ hot pants, which is why the exhibition will be a huge success.

I think it is quite dangerous to correlate popular culture with lowbrow culture. The idea that something appeals to the masses and is popular shouldn’t be dismissed as being rubbish simply because it is of the masses. I think that is quite an elitist view.
With regards to museums I always thought that they were supposed to record and preserve objects and artefacts, which represent aspect of life and culture (in the broadest sense of the word culture), and not just highbrow collections or the cultures of the intellectually elite?
I think the collections should be exclusive, and representative of the people for the people (sorry I am going a bit citizen smith here, ) and it could be argued that Ms Minogue as a mediated / constructed artefact is representative of our times.

As for the public who view the Kylie exhibit not being a thinking public, I have to disagree. It’s the same problem I have with Adorno & Horkhiemer’s view of the culture industry, accusing the masses of all being cultural dupes . I believe quite strongly in the idea of human agency & that audiences are critical in their consumption. Makes me think of that horrid phrase, “dumbing down”. I don’t think that by going to a Kylie exhibition at the V&A the audience/consumer is dumbing down at all or the V&A for that matter – its all about values & taste and one class imposing its cultural capital on another.

Sorry I meant to say " think the collections should be inclusive"
typing a bit fast

Okay, if you are right and the public/masses care about this KM "phenomenon", then this might be yet another indicator of the demise of this society. A society which confuses politeness with ignorance.

And a society which doesn't give a damn about the important issues in the world.