Have you ever found yourself wondering what the tiny pocket-within-a-pocket is for on your jeans? You know the one I’m talking about; that small, seemingly useless space that doesn’t appear large enough to hold anything.
If you’ve ever tried to see what fits in there, you’ll know it’s far too small for a cellphone, while it’s awkward to jam cash – be it coins or notes – in there. The same goes for a ring of keys; there just isn’t room.
So what are those little pockets for? Well, fortunately for our curious readers, we have something of an answer… and it might not be at all what you were expecting.
Be they male or female models, chances are if you look at a pair of jeans, you’ll find two pockets on the front and two pockets on the back. What you might also find, however, is a strange little pocket inside one of the front pockets.
Go ahead and have a look. Almost all jeans have them, though their presence is enough to leave most of us scratching our heads.
As mentioned above, these pockets are far too small to hold anything of real significance (even getting two fingers into them is a challenge). So what purpose do they actually serve?
Interestingly, to find the origin we have to go back almost two hundred years. That little thumbnail-sized pocket isn’t a modern addition to jeans; instead, it was a practical solution for something that’s no longer a real problem today.
Behind the invention is none other than legendary jean manufacturer Levi’s.
According to UK newspaper The Independent, the first ‘extra’ pocket came into use in the 1800s. The reason? To assist the most common wearers of jeans at that point in time… cowboys.
Cowboys usually carried their pocket watches on chains or inside their waistcoats, but both of these methods put the watch at great risk of being broken during their owner’s day-to-day duties.
In order to combat this, Levi’s introduced a small pocket designed to carry a watch safely. By keeping their watches in these tiny pockets, cowboys could ride without fear of them being smashed on a ride.
How’s that for innovation?
If I’m honest, I had no idea. If you ask me, it’s incredible that the design has stuck with jeans all the way through to modern day. Cowboys might no longer be around, but their watch pockets certainly are!
She was considered to be the most beautiful actress in the 80th. But time takes its toll – the star looks so different now. You won’t recognize the movie star when you see this wrinkled old lady.
Rachel Ward, known for her iconic role as Maggie in “Singing in the Blackthorns,” was once celebrated as the most stunning actress in cinema. Forty years ago, she captivated audiences with her striking beauty and talent. However, as time has passed, the effects of aging have become evident.
Now 66 years old, Rachel looks quite different from her 80s persona, especially without makeup and styling. Recent photos of her have sparked mixed reactions. Many express surprise and nostalgia, reminiscing about her past allure. Comments often reflect this duality, with some admiring her natural aging process and others lamenting the changes brought by time.
Despite the physical changes, Rachel Ward’s talent and the impact of her performances remain unchanged. Her portrayal of Maggie in “Singing in the Blackthorns” continues to resonate with audiences, eliciting fond memories and appreciation for her skill. This beloved film has cemented her place in cinematic history, and her work is still celebrated by fans old and new.
Rachel’s decision to age gracefully, without resorting to cosmetic enhancements, has garnered admiration from many who see her as a symbol of dignified aging. They appreciate her for embracing her natural self and staying true to who she is.
Regardless of differing opinions, Rachel Ward’s legacy in the film industry is undeniable. Her iconic role as Maggie remains a testament to her enduring talent and charm.
Leave a Reply