r/DearConsumers

How do you make Schiaparelli boring?

Genuinely. How?

This is the house of Elsa Schiaparelli — a couture legacy built on surrealism, theatricality, illusion, anatomical gold hardware, exaggerated silhouettes, and fashion so visually confrontational it helped redefine what couture could even be. Under Daniel Roseberry, the brand has become synonymous with modern spectacle: sculptural corsetry, impossible proportions, gilded fantasy, and red carpet moments that practically demand cultural conversation.

And somehow, Lauren Sánchez arrived at the Met Gala in Schiaparelli looking… underwhelming.

To be clear, she looked beautiful. Lauren Sánchez is an undeniably glamorous woman with the kind of hyper-polished bombshell presence that naturally lends itself to couture. But the gown itself felt strangely empty — more “luxury awards season” than “Fashion Is Art.”

For someone married to arguably the wealthiest man on the planet, attending fashion’s most theatrical night in one of couture’s most visually daring houses, the expectations should have been astronomical. Instead, the look felt aggressively safe. The silhouette lacked drama, the styling lacked imagination, and the overall effect never escalated into anything memorable despite the pedigree behind it.

And that is what makes the look so frustrating.

Schiaparelli should overwhelm you a little. It should provoke a reaction. Even when the house misses, it usually misses loudly. But this felt restrained to the point of creative disappearance — a gown that looked expensive without ever becoming interesting.

On a carpet filled with attendees attempting sculpture, fantasy, surrealism, and artistic transformation, Lauren Sánchez’s Schiaparelli somehow landed in the aesthetic territory of “D-List celebrity Attending Prom”

Beautiful?
Certainly.

But the Met Gala is not simply about beauty.

It is about image-making, risk, fantasy, and understanding the difference between wearing couture and embodying it. And unfortunately, this look never fully crossed that line.

For a house like Schiaparelli — and for a woman with virtually unlimited access to fashion’s most extraordinary resources — “pretty” should never have been the final result.

For years, one of the most frustrating aspects of the Met Gala has been watching the men approach fashion with the creative ambition of a corporate awards banquet. While the women were expected to embody fantasy, narrative, and spectacle, many male attendees seemed content to rotate between slightly different variations of the same black tuxedo and call it “classic.” Somewhere along the way, menswear on the Met carpet became painfully allergic to imagination.

That is why this year felt refreshing.

For the first time in a long while, there was a noticeable shift in how men approached the theme. We saw dramatic tailoring, embellishment, historical references, sculptural silhouettes, rich textiles, jewelry, capes, and genuine theatricality. More importantly, we saw men willing to participate in fashion instead of merely wearing clothes. And there is a difference.

The strongest looks of the night understood that tailoring itself is not the problem. A suit can absolutely be artistic. The issue has always been the lack of vision surrounding it. Too many male celebrities have historically treated fashion as something to survive rather than something to engage with creatively. But the Met Gala is not meant to be safe. It is one of the only red carpets where excess, absurdity, and performance are not only welcomed but expected.

What made this year exciting was seeing men finally loosen their grip on the idea that masculinity must remain visually restrained in order to appear sophisticated. Some of the best dressed attendees embraced softness, ornamentation, exaggeration, and even vanity — all things menswear desperately needs more of. Fashion becomes infinitely more compelling when men stop dressing out of fear.

That being said, this is still very much a work in progress. While it was absolutely a step in the right direction, there is still plenty of room for evolution. I want to see even more risk next year. More storytelling. More references pulled from art, history, cinema, and fantasy. I want men to arrive looking slightly unhinged in the pursuit of beauty rather than merely “well-tailored.”

But for the first time in years, I walked away from the Met carpet genuinely optimistic about the future of menswear. And honestly? That alone felt like a fashion miracle.

I do not subscribe to the juvenile belief that wealth itself is inherently immoral. Frankly, I come from a lower upper-class family myself, and I enjoy luxury, fashion, beautiful homes, and the worlds that money can open access to. Aspiration has always been intertwined with fashion. Glamour has always had patrons. But there is a profound difference between old notions of patronage and allowing one of the most morally dubious billionaires on earth to effectively underwrite the most important night in fashion while simultaneously parading across its carpet like royalty.

Jeff Bezos attending the Met Gala as a sponsor felt less like a celebration of art and more like a hostile corporate acquisition of culture itself. This is a man whose empire has become synonymous with worker exploitation, anti-union aggression, grotesque wealth hoarding, and the flattening of small businesses into logistical roadkill. Watching the fashion industry enthusiastically polish his image for a few photo opportunities was not glamorous. It was embarrassingly sycophantic.

And then there was Lauren Sánchez’s Schiaparelli gown — perhaps the evening’s greatest contradiction. Schiaparelli is a house built on audacity, surrealism, tension, wit. Elsa Schiaparelli understood that fashion should provoke emotion, even discomfort. Yet somehow, impossibly, they managed to make Schiaparelli feel like a luxury condo lobby in Miami. How do you make one of the most imaginative couture houses on earth look this lifeless?

The gown itself was not offensive because it was ugly. Frankly, ugly would have been preferable. Ugly can at least be interesting. The true crime was that it was sterile. Every inch of it radiated the aesthetic instincts of people who desperately want to be perceived as sophisticated but fundamentally do not understand fashion beyond price tags and exclusivity. There was no fantasy, no danger, no humor, no point of view. Just money. Endless, suffocating money.
More on Substack

Anok Yai’s Balenciaga was one of the most intellectually compelling interpretations of “Fashion Is Art” at this year’s Met Gala because it understood something many attendees missed: art does not always need to be loud to be unforgettable.

Drawing heavily from Cristóbal Balenciaga’s sculptural approach to couture, the look felt rooted in old-world fashion discipline — severe, architectural, almost devotional in its construction. The tightly ruched bodice, dramatic black opera gloves, and exaggerated hood framing Anok’s face evoked religious portraiture, mourning dress, and ecclesiastical silhouettes all at once.

There were echoes of Spanish Catholic iconography throughout the look, particularly in the way the hood created a halo-like darkness around her face, transforming Anok into something between a widow, a saint, and a couture apparition. The vast black skirt and sweeping train added to that sense of ritual and ceremony, recalling the emotional severity often found in Cristóbal Balenciaga’s historical couture collections.

What made the look extraordinary, however, was how modern it still felt.

Rather than leaning into costume, the gown distilled those references into a sharply contemporary fashion image. The beauty styling — slick sculptural hair, lacquered skin, almost ghostly stillness in her expression — heightened the sense that she was not simply wearing the garment but embodying the atmosphere behind it.

This is where Anok Yai consistently succeeds as a model: she understands that couture is not just about clothing, but transformation.

In a year filled with overly literal interpretations of “Fashion Is Art,” Anok’s Balenciaga stood apart because it approached fashion the way true couture always has — as emotion, silhouette, mood, and visual mythology.

The tragedy of Chloe Malle’s Met Gala appearance was not that the dress was unattractive.

It was that it was utterly devoid of authorship.

At an event themed “Costume Art,” under a dress code explicitly titled “Fashion Is Art,” Malle arrived in a washed saffron chiffon column so visually passive, so conceptually inert, that it seemed almost hostile to the very premise of the evening. The draping was timid, the styling emotionally vacant, the silhouette devoid of tension or architectural intrigue. Even the color — a muted burnt apricot — collapsed under the lights rather than commanding them.

Nothing about the look suggested curiosity. Nothing suggested fantasy. Nothing suggested a woman intellectually engaged with fashion as an artistic medium rather than simply expensive clothing.

And perhaps that would matter less were Chloe Malle merely another social fixture orbiting the Vogue ecosystem. But she is not. She is Vogue’s Head of Editorial Content — a woman increasingly positioned as part of the publication’s post-Wintour future. Which means her appearance cannot be viewed in isolation from the institution she now helps shape.

That is where the disappointment becomes genuinely alarming.

Because fashion, particularly at the Met Gala, is not about “looking pretty.” The Met Gala exists as fashion’s annual argument for its own cultural legitimacy. It is the one evening where editors, designers, celebrities, and image-makers are expected to treat clothing not as commerce, but as spectacle, symbolism, theater, provocation, and visual language.

Malle’s gown rejected all of that.

It did not reinterpret the theme.
It did not challenge it.
It did not transcend it.
It barely acknowledged it.

Instead, it occupied that increasingly exhausting space modern fashion media mistakes for sophistication: expensive neutrality. The contemporary Vogue aesthetic has become so obsessed with appearing tasteful, restrained, and socially polished that it increasingly feels terrified of conviction itself. What was once editorial discernment has calcified into aesthetic risk-aversion.

And Chloe Malle’s dress embodied that perfectly.

Under Anna Wintour, Vogue understood something essential: fashion imagery must occasionally overwhelm you. Seduce you. Disturb you. Offend you. Transport you. Even Wintour’s own famously controlled personal style existed against the backdrop of a magazine unafraid of excess, fantasy, theatricality, or visual domination.

But Malle’s Met Gala appearance projected none of that editorial appetite. Instead, it suggested a Vogue future governed by caution rather than imagination — a publication more interested in tasteful social signaling than image-making.

The gown itself was forgettable.

What it represented was not.

Because when the woman potentially inheriting the most powerful seat in fashion arrives at fashion’s most important night looking this uninspired, one cannot help but wonder whether Vogue still understands the difference between refinement and irrelevance.

#Vogue #metgala #metgala2026 #chloemalle

For a first Met Gala appearance, Jisoo understood exactly what the moment required: elegance with intention.

The Blackpink star made her long-awaited Met Gala debut in custom Dior by Jonathan Anderson, arriving in a shimmering blush-pink gown that immediately distinguished itself through craftsmanship rather than spectacle. And in a year where many attendees confused excess for artistry, that restraint felt refreshing.

The dress itself was rooted in Impressionism, with Anderson reportedly drawing inspiration from Claude Monet and Dior’s longstanding relationship with painterly romanticism. The result was a strapless backless column gown embroidered with delicate garden motifs, floral embellishments, sequins, and soft gazar draping that moved almost like watercolor under the lights.

What made the look so successful was its refusal to overpower Jisoo herself.

The styling remained clean and deliberate: soft blonde-toned beauty, minimal accessories beyond extraordinary Cartier archival jewelry, and a silhouette that allowed the embroidery and craftsmanship to remain the focal point. The Cartier Collection necklace from 1905 added just enough old-world glamour to anchor the look historically without pulling it into costume territory.

And perhaps most importantly, the gown understood the theme.

“Fashion Is Art” did not require every attendee to arrive in sculptural armor or theatrical couture exaggeration. Jisoo’s Dior succeeded because it approached art through texture, embroidery, movement, and historical romanticism rather than obvious gimmickry. There was something deeply painterly about the entire presentation — as though she had stepped out of an Impressionist canvas rather than a fitting room.

For a first Met Gala, it was remarkably assured.

At the 2026 Met Gala, the red carpet ceased to function merely as a parade of celebrity dressing and instead became something far more compelling: a living study of art history interpreted through couture. Across the evening, guests arrived not simply wearing fashion, but embodying references drawn from painting, sculpture, surrealism, and portraiture.

Gracie Abrams channeled the gilded romanticism of Gustav Klimt in Chanel, while Rachel Zegler evoked the haunting tragedy of The Execution of Lady Jane Grey in Prabal Gurung. Claire Foy recalled the poised sensuality of John Singer Sargent’s Madame X in Erdem, and Kendall Jenner’s sculptural Zac Posen gown echoed the windswept drapery of the Winged Victory of Samothrace.

Elsewhere, Madonna referenced the dreamlike surrealism of Leonora Carrington in Saint Laurent, Hunter Schafer stepped into Klimt’s Mäda Primavesi through Prada, and Rosé’s Saint Laurent look nodded to Georges Braque’s The Birds.

The result was a carpet that felt less like an awards show arrival line and more like a curated exhibition — one where couture became interpretation, and fashion reasserted itself as an art form in its own right. Swipe to see the artworks behind the looks.

#MetGala #FashionIsArt #TheEditByZahra