A Year Later, Balenciaga Is Uncanceled
In the debate of whether or not we've collectively moved on, the verdict seems to have been reached.
“I have decided to go back to my roots in fashion as well as to the roots of Balenciaga, which is making quality clothes — not making image or buzz.” These were the words Balenciaga’s creative director Demna Gvasalia told Vogue back in February in an interview-slash-act-of-contrition after a storm of scandal for the brand.
On Sunday, stars including Usher, Emily Ratajkowski, Erykah Badu and Paris Hilton gathered at a “grandiose red velvet setting reminiscent of an old French theater,” according to WWD, for Balenciaga’s Spring/Summer 2024 Paris Fashion Week show at the Cour du Dôme des Invalides.
Attendees then watched as Demna’s mother, his boyfriend (composer BFRND), fashion critic Cathy Horyn, industry icon Diane Pernet, nightlife luminary Amanda Lepore, curator at Palais Galliera Miren Arzalluz, French pop star Yseult and more trotted down the runway.
PAW Patrol: The Mighty Movie voice actress Kim Kardashian, ten months after stating she was “re-evaluating [her] relationship with the brand,” was included in the lookbook, though she did not walk.
Isabelle Huppert narrated the show’s soundtrack, reading out instructions on how to make a tailored jacket. For a brand not trying to make image or buzz, this was… buzzy.
This begged the question: In the debate of “Is Balenciaga still canceled, or did we move on?”, the SS24 show seems to have delivered the ruling. We — and I don’t mean you and I so much as I mean the larger culture — have moved on. What does that say about the controversy? What does it say about cancellation? (I refuse to use the term “cancel culture” as it’s taken on too diluted a meaning.)
Here was the landscape just a few months ago:
“Kering Q4 Forecasts Imply Balenciaga Ad Controversies Could Contribute to Declining Numbers.”
“Celebs protest controversial Balenciaga holiday campaign by throwing out and burning their clothes.”
“Kering Q4 Forecasts Imply Balenciaga Ad Controversies Could Contribute to Declining Numbers.”
Now:
Cathy Horyn, one of the few remaining reputable fashion critics with some teeth (see her recent “At Paris Fashion Week, A Poverty of Imagination”), was unable to review the show due to her being, well, in it.
Whereas the conversations earlier this year were centered on “reputational rehab” and “contrition,” my search today for any sentiment in that vein came up short. Props to fashion commentator Luke Meagher for saying what I think many either fail to see or simply don’t want to admit: “The fear of the fallout of the scandal seems to have paralyzed the brand, and it’s starting to show these past few collections.”
But overall, it seems abundantly clear that luxury goods market analyst Luca Solca was correct when he predicted to the New York Times earlier this year that Balenciaga would be “home and dry by the second half of 2023.” In his argument, he made the comparison to the Gucci blackface scandal of 2019 in showing that repentance and time can lead many to forgive and forget.
As such, I think there’s a larger conversation to be had here, not just about the fashion industry’s ability to treat scandal as disposably as a trend (that’s status quo, baby), but in how we look at cancellation — and how cancellation as a (false) concept might actually help in facilitating a redemption arc, one that can position a brand as a phoenix rising from the ashes; a victim of cancellation as opposed to the creator of their own scandal. Brands might conceivably look at these fashion scandals, of which there is a rich lineage, and see more pros than cons.
“Fashion thrives on backlash,” wrote Olivia Petter for the Independent in November of last year. “If the fashion industry keeps neglecting to learn from their mistakes, at what point do they stop being mistakes entirely?” Petter asked. To add to that: At what point do we get privy to the reality that powerful entities, especially those with deep pockets, are rather impenetrable to criticism? As Petter posited: Perhaps the reason fashion keeps getting it wrong is because it wants to.
Notable about this Balenciaga instance is the short turnaround time from canceled to uncanceled status. John Galliano’s career took years to restart, and has never truly bounced back. Dolce & Gabbana have never been able to fully move away from a litany of controversies, despite throwing boatloads of money at the effort. But many brands have been able to move on quite efficiently with no long-term dent in their bottom line or their reputation: Gucci. Prada. Burberry. Even Balenciaga of the past. Each case varies in terms of the scandal itself, the press it got, and the ways in which the brand handled it, but all were able to move forward unscathed.
At the end of the day, as the globalization of the fashion industry forces profits over artistry to reign supreme, the truest bellwether lies in sales, which will require more time to play out and fully paint the picture. But if the starry front row, the buzzy casting and the overall conversation I’m seeing online are any indicator, Balenciaga has successfully shifted to a space beyond post-controversy in which the controversy of the past is no longer factored into the present-day conversation (Justin Bieber saying he hopes Anne Frank would have been a Belieber is among my favorite examples of this phenomenon lost to time).
So with the heat off Balenciaga the question then becomes: Who’s next?