A blurry, somewhat overexposed shot from the 1973 Met Gala depicts a room full of people who appear genuinely unsure about what the evening would bring. There was genuine tension throughout those early incidents. Fashion experts debating whether clothing qualifies as art at a museum, not knowing how the public would react. Whatever the initial doubt was, it resulted in something. At least a dialogue. There was occasionally a real change in the industry’s self-perception.
In more recent iterations of the event, that quality is hard to come by. Instead, what you see when you browse the carpet coverage or watch the arrival footage live on social media is an extremely well-planned display of people who have carefully considered how to avoid making a mistake. The pre-announced themes, some of which are actually intriguing on paper and the kind of prompts that could encourage genuine creative risk, typically result in a carpet where most looks are exquisite in a way that doesn’t need to be explained or challenge anyone. secure. polished. economically feasible. instantly readable by as many people as possible.
Although the corporate turn has been gradual, it is now difficult to ignore. Tech businesses like OpenAI and Meta bought tables, and Jeff and Lauren Sánchez Bezos served as honorary chairs for a recent edition, indicating what the event has evolved into and who it now serves. The money is still given to the Costume Institute, and the exhibitions it supports are truly outstanding. There has been no change in that portion of the equation. The room’s character has evolved, as evidenced by the variety of persons there, the type of transactions taking place nearby, and the message the carpet now conveys when interpreted as a cultural text rather than a means of earning money.
Over the course of several decades, Anna Wintour expanded the guest list in accordance with a logical strategic calculation: a broader definition of cultural influence results in a larger donor base and increased media attention. Based on the numbers, it was successful. The event makes more money than it has in the past. However, expanding the criteria of who is eligible to walk the red carpet to include everyone with pop-culture influence and online presence, as well as fashion insiders and their creative partners, has changed the tone in ways that are become harder to undo. The presence of individuals whose relationship to fashion is essentially transactional has undermined the rigorous design discourse that formerly characterized the institution.
Not because activists have become more confrontational, but rather because the visual contrast has grown more striking, the protest action outside the museum has been more coordinated and apparent in recent years. The disparity between what is on exhibit at the event and what is going on in the surrounding city, both politically and economically, as well as in terms of housing, labor, and basic access, has grown to the point where the juxtaposition speaks for itself. The organizers of the event seem to be aware of this tension and have yet to come up with a well-thought-out solution.
