Even if we don’t believe in or support the Met Gala, we cannot deny…it’s incredibly fun to look at (and in some cases, critique) all of the outfits on display each year. The Met Gala has always garnered a range of reactions: some praise it as a celebration of fashion’s growth and reach, while others consider it a massive event of elitism, a consumerist distraction, and heavily removed from social realities.
For most viewers of the Met Gala, the rolled out carpet, flashing cameras, and luxurious bathroom selfies exist outside of their frame of reality. It is an event of exclusivity, a public space and encounter that only few will ever be able to access/be invited to, i.e. not us. That is indeed part of its appeal, but also what makes it so polarizing. And yet, in the month of May, it is the thing on everyone’s lips.
This year, however, things were a little different. This year, the Met Gala’s theme was “Superfine: Tailoring Black Style” with a dress code of “Tailored for You.” Unlike previous themes predicated on White/European fashion and history (or ones where no one understood the assignment cough cough Camp: Notes on Fashion), this year the focus was on Blackness and Black culture, and people everywhere were ecstatic to say the least. Not only were the Met Gala 2025 chairs prominent Black figures in media and fashion —Colman Domingo, A$AP Rocky, Pharrell Williams, and Lewis Hamilton— but all eyes and cameras were on Black attendees, another notable shift from previous years. Such a focused theme and celebration of Blackness in the limelight reminds me of bell hooks’ experience at the cinema, or rather, what she wished it could have been. For the first time, Black audiences may not have needed to develop an “oppositional gaze” in order to experience the Met, not needing to “consciously resist…identification” so as to “not look too deep” (hooks 212).
This time, it was their lives that were centered, their history, their fashion. They did not need to find a way to make themselves present in an absence of their selfhood, but could see themselves represented in these figures— adorned in gorgeous attire—who looked like them. And truly…the looks this year were STUNNING and it was so refreshing to see such a commitment to theme, especially by Black attendees (my favorites include Janelle Monae, Teyana Taylor, and Lauryn Hill!)
Indeed, as Law Roach so appropriately said, “They done fucked up and made the Met Gala Black!”
And yet…something about this feels not quite right. Why did Anna Wintour choose this theme? Noticing the backlash, was this all just a play to appease spectators of color to raise more awareness and by extension, raise more money? To what extent is the Met a site of tokenism in this one-off occasion where finally there is a recognition of Black livelihood? I am hesitant to say that there was no consideration of Black spectatorship, for making a spectacle of Blackness for one night and one night only sends a message: our recognition of your culture is temporary, and yet, by centering it this once, we can control the way you interrogate us. We are giving you a platform, we are putting you on display, be grateful and give us your attention. Even the New York Times, in an article titled The Tricky Politics of This Year’s Met Gala, wrote that “suddenly the Met…has begun to look like the resistance. And the gala, which in recent years has been criticized as a tone-deaf display of privilege and fashion absurdity, is being seen as…a display of ‘allyship’” (Friedman 2025). But…is it? Is this truly the most radical act of solidarity and collectivity in our current climate? Or is it a simple motion of performative inclusivity? If Blackness was truly important to the Met, it would be present in every single Met Gala. There would be genuine, active, mutual-aid efforts on the part of the Met to support Black communities. So again… I ask… to what extent might we imagine this event as sincere appreciation or commodification of Black culture—an event where capturing and manipulating the gaze of the “Other” (the non-elite, the normal, the common) is an essential act for its survival and continuation?
2 replies on ““The Best Met Gala We’ve Seen in Years””
Abby- I love that you’re as online as I am. The 2025 Met Gala was fascinating to observe, and since the theme had been released, I was curious about how the public would receive it. Considering the rapid rise of right-wing politics and fascism, it was hard for me to understand how and why the Met chose this theme for this year. Not because I disagree with the choice, but it requires a nuanced approach for many of the reasons you discussed. This gala is historically white, and considering the level of fame and its founder, it is centered around the implicit privilege whiteness holds in our society. Because of this, I can’t fully see an event as trying to resist anything when it is fundamentally built off of showcasing celebrities who do not represent people en masse and have privileges that afford them the right to attend. I don’t think anything Anna Wintour can do anything resistant because of her privileges… because of her privileges, she can afford to explicitly say what she is aiming for rather than have others speculate about the hidden meanings of something ‘different’ she is doing.
Abby, I love how you incorporated Tweets throughout your post to make it so engaging. It was really enjoyable to read! I don’t have a definite response to your question, but I do think we can gain a better understanding of the Met Gala’s true intentions by seeing what themes they pick in the future, what causes they fundraise for, and what celebrities’ looks are being highlighted. Representation by the media and organizations such as the Met Gala is tricky since its intentions are usually profit driven, so I would argue that representation is rarely sincere. Do you think sincere representation is possible if profit is involved (since money is almost always involved in representation produced by the media)?