Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Roadkill Turned Into High Fashion

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the green-meat-hats dept.

Idle 7

You might think a raccoon that has been smashed flat by a car is disgusting, but aspiring fashion designer James Faulkner thinks it would make a wonderful hat. Faulkner's makes hats from the feather and fur of animals that have been killed on roads. Most of his hats are made of foxes, magpies, rabbits, wood pigeons, pheasants, mallards, crows and peacocks. Faulkner says, "It sounds very sinister, but I find it very satisfying to make something beautiful from something gruesome. It started when my friend wanted to buy a hat for her wedding. Without thinking, I said I'd make one, then I instantly panicked, but one day I was walking along the road and I spotted a magpie in quite a sorry state. I knew that my friend's dress was black and white so I thought it could work. I picked it up using a plastic bag and later used the wing feathers to make the hat. It sounds awful, but I cut off the wings with an axe."

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

let me be the first to say (1)

robnator (250608) | more than 4 years ago | (#31497836)


Re:let me be the first to say (1)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 4 years ago | (#31501424)

I agree, but I can't really say why.

I mean, my wallet, shoes, belt and watch band are made from animals that were killed expressly for that purpose. I don't see it as "icky" to have my leather watch belt against my skin most of the day. I don't understand why it would be somehow more disgusting to have bits from another dead animal on my person, frankly. In fact, if the animal died anyway, I guess it would be somewhat less morally objectionable in some ways. Kind of a recycling thing.

I don't know why any rational creature would consider this "yuck".

And, yet, it somehow is.

Humans. We're some real pieces of work, aren't we?

Re:let me be the first to say (1)

Fluffeh (1273756) | more than 4 years ago | (#31505092)

I don't know, I don't find it yuck at all. I wear leather shoes and stuff, and the concept of making something out of a dead animal isn't really that "out there" for me. Look around, we make SOOOO much stuff out of dead bits of things. Wooden floorboards? Cotton clothing? Woolen jumpers? Want gruesome? take this example:

A lovely old armchair in your grandparents home could quite easily have the following:
Main body: Dead wood.
Cushion inlay: Dead hair from a horse.
Cushion material: Leather from a cow.
Varnish on the wood for extra color: Shellac [] (made from resin is a brittle or flaky secretion of the female lac insect)
The glue used in the joints of the armchair: Likely made from boiled animal sinew [] .

Still think a hat with a few roadkill feathers is gruesome?

Re:let me be the first to say (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 4 years ago | (#31521146)

I agree, but I can't really say why.

Illnesses, I guess.

An animal that's been dead for some time already has started decomposing, and you don't really want to eat (or even touch) that, rather than one you (or one of your buddies) freshly killed yourself. And "yuck" is just the evolutionary mechanism to enforce this.

But, but... (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#31499126)

Mr. Faulkner, why is there a tire track on my hat?

Pants (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31508806)

Idle is pants; pants made from woodchuck roadkill.

Might as well put them to good use... (1)

clone53421 (1310749) | more than 4 years ago | (#31514764)

Seems to me that this would be more acceptable to people who won’t wear fur or feathers for moral reasons. Killing an animal for its feathers or fur alone may offend their sensibility, but if the animal was killed accidentally, it should make sense to at least make use of the remains.

At least, that’s how I see it. I’m not against killing animals for their fur or feathers in the first place, so maybe they see it differently.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?