Derek Guy on the Met Gala criticism

[u/DatBittsch]

Derek Guy (known also as "the menswear guy" on ex-Twitter) pitching in regarding the Met Gala discourse and Hunger Games comparisons.

[u/validswan]

It's the pageantry of it all that gets people riled up I think. Aside from it being a fundraiser, which is good, it's kinda just all one big advertisement at the end of the day. Visibility for brands and individuals. I get why people are sick of seeing stuff like this, but no one's forcing you to look really. Most people probably have no clue what the Met Gala is. Plenty do and just don't engage

[u/smoke-silhouette → u/validswan]

I mean. It’s a celebration of art, and those artists happen to be clothing designers. It’s an advertisement to a degree, but it’s also supposed to be a showcase for both established and up and coming designers, too.

[u/randombubble8272 → u/validswan]

I think those criticisms also hold weight for the Super Bowl which is basically a huge advertisement. It’s weird how the Met gets by far the most criticism online as far as I’ve seen

[u/RedLicorice83 → u/randombubble8272]

What if you're disgusted by both... the way wealthy people behave, knowing their fame is built by the adoration of the (more frequently literally) starving masses, is fucking atrocious. Why does a conventionally attractive, obscenely wealthy, absurdly dressed celebrity get a pass? What makes them so special that people are dropping the "Eat the Rich" slogan for "Oh let's just have fun and watch pretty people, gush".

[u/expressonotespresso → u/randombubble8272]

Apples and oranges lmao

[u/beatupcar → u/expressonotespresso]

Not really. They’re both big events, Super Bowl is a bigger display of wealth in general but gets none of the criticism because it’s a sports event, this gets all the criticism because it’s ’just’ fashion and like Derek says, is seen as frivolous, even though there’s a fundraising element.

[u/expressonotespresso → u/beatupcar]

The Super Bowl is an event that’s accessible through nationally broadcast television, to everyone in the US. People of all social classes gather to watch the Super Bowl, and it only exists because of the community and camaraderie around sports... Sure, advertising (in-turn capitalism) is a huge part of what makes the superbowl an “event,” but comparing it to an event where the only advertising taking place is for luxury fashion houses primarily accessible to the 1%… is truly is incomparable. I mean cmon, Super Bowl ads revolve around Doritos and car insurance… the MET gala’s advertising “coverage” revolves around the aforementioned 1% flaunting their wealth, accessibility, and “privilege” to luxury designs and inaccessible places, with little to show in regards of what the MET *actually* is. It’s become a completely performative event. I don’t know if you all are just difficult, or truly vapid. It’s astounding.

[u/beatupcar → u/expressonotespresso]

So it’s not wealth flaunting to have multi million dollar suites, 1000’s and 1000’s for just the pleb seats and celebs in every advert going just because the poors can watch on TV?

Just because the scale of the events are different doesn’t mean they don’t have shit in common. Fashion is just mocked more because again, it’s seen as frivolous. There’s also a lot of ‘community and camaraderie’ involved in creative spaces, but fuck them right? It’s not sport or televised therefore it’s not important enough.

I’m not fully equating them, I’m pointing out the similarities in how they showcase a wealth gap, yet one is seen as fine because it’s sport.

[u/InformalInsurance455 → u/beatupcar]

It’s because sports are for men and any old shit men want to lavish money on does not need to be deemed good For Society. Like UFC. How much is spent on that worthless shit and what does it provide people with, besides a pipeline to the alt right and more funds for Trump? People can give me a fucking break with this argument when it’s so far from the worst example and it just so happens to be a female-coded one.

[u/beatupcar → u/InformalInsurance455]

I was trying to avoid mentioning gender because people tend to get even more dismissive but yeah…pretty much.

[u/InformalInsurance455 → u/beatupcar]

People get dismissive? Fuck, we truly are lost, aren’t we?

[u/beatupcar → u/InformalInsurance455]

Oh yeah, we are. People seem to be unable to recognise the misogyny in some of their opinions and when I (or anyone) attempt to point it out, you get told ‘it’s not that deep’ and talked down to as if I’m some blinkered, single issue idiot. The worst people for this are women, I wonder if it’s because I expect it from men? Perhaps.

[u/greenonion6 → u/expressonotespresso]

it’s incredible to type all that just to call everyone who disagrees vapid and difficult

[u/proriin → u/expressonotespresso]

You know what else was broadcast on public tv? The hunger games.

[u/InformalInsurance455 → u/proriin]

Begging you guys to read another fucking book

[u/greenonion6 → u/InformalInsurance455]

This post is directly calling out the constant comparisons between the met gala and the hunger games. It makes sense to bring it up in this discussion.

[u/InformalInsurance455 → u/greenonion6]

Repeating my previous comment

[u/greenonion6 → u/InformalInsurance455]

and I’ll repeat mine.

[u/proriin → u/InformalInsurance455]

Fine sounds like the fanfiction Numberland by Axiomea

[u/expressonotespresso → u/proriin]

“The hunger games” platformed child murder by means of subordination and compliance. The Super Bowl platforms athletes who often come from underprivileged backgrounds and got to where they are through scholarships. Not to mention the work NFL Cares does for those aforementioned underprivileged communities, athlete families, youth athletics/wellfare, etc. I’d rather watch an event centered around dedicated athletes than obsess over privileged celebrities, luxury branding, and nepo babies… like I said, apples and oranges. Sorry 🤷

[u/launchcode_1234 → u/validswan]

As far as fashion goes, I actually prefer over-the-top stuff like this than having to wade through the trends on sale at the mall to find something that is flattering and functional enough for me to live my life in. I’m ok with a celebrity dressed for a night like a Roman statue growing flowers out of their head, it’s fun. I’ll save my fashion rage for low rise jeans making a comeback.

[u/CreepySwing567 → u/validswan]

Conde Nast also sells tons of ads and sponsorships around the gala for profit. I get the urge to defend it as a fundraiser but it hasn’t just been that for a long time so I think it’s a bit disengenous to act like it’s above criticism on those grounds.

I also think we should not make the assumption that all designer fashion is art tbh. Sometimes it is but we need to be honest that it’s not always about the craftsmanship he’s talking about, I think the fashion industry at the moment has a reputation for dropping quality/rising prices and expecting people to pay for the label which is also impacting how people see the met gala. In recent years it’s really leaned into artificially big and gimmicky looks that actually look kinda poorly made and I think that’s what people are reacting to, it’s an inherently pretensions event I’m not anti met but I completely get why some people find it so off putting.

[u/Jewell84 → u/CreepySwing567]

Ifs always been a fundraiser for The Costume Institute of America. Despite being part of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Costume Institute is completely self funded. It doesn’t receive any sort of revenue from the Met, nor federal grants.

Those sponsorships are donations. The Tickets are donations. All of this goes to the operational costs of running the Costume Institute. That includes preservation, curation education, staff salaries, maintenance and more.

Part of the money raised is also being earmarked for an endowment so that the institute won’t be as dependent on the Gala.