Thousands of viewers wait with baited breath, their eyes glued to their television screens waiting for the first celebrity arrival. Hordes of ravenous paparazzi fight for a better angle, clamoring for the perfect shot. Finally, rising star Timothee Chalamet saunters up the iconic red carpet steps in an all white, half-casual half-tuxedo outfit paired with timeless Chuck Taylors. His entrance marks the beginning of the 2021 Met Gala, the most exclusive (and expensive) party on the East Coast. This year’s theme? “In America: A Lexicon of Fashion.” 

Over the past 20 years, the event has become a staple of high fashion and popular culture, even becoming overtly political at times. In the wake of its increased popularity and Vogue’s deliberate representation of oppressed groups and themes, many have lauded the Gala as a venue for both high fashion and activism. Yet, the Met Gala is not the progressive event on the forefront of fashion, pop culture, and politics that it claims to be. Rather, it’s a vehicle for hypocrisy and controversy, performative activism, and a gauche reminder of the ever-increasing wealth gap between the rich and the poor. 

Every year, high profile celebrities and fashion designers clamor for a spot on Anna Wintour’s carefully curated guest list, which is designed for maximum publicity and minimum accessibility. Wintour has chaired the Met Gala since 1995 and transformed the event into a massive philanthropic endeavor, collecting millions of dollars to fund the Metropolitan Museum of Art's Costume Institute. The Metropolitan Museum was founded by American art collectors and businessmen in the late 1800s. Over time, it amassed a sizable collection of artifacts and art, first emphasizing Rome and Egypt, then later branching out to include African, East Asian, and eventually Middle Eastern cultural traditions. The Costume Institute became a museum exhibit in 1959, but its recent popularity is due to Wintour’s leadership of the Gala. She launched both the benefit and the exhibit into the public eye thanks to her introduction of annual themes and her selective guest-list criteria based on buzz, achievement, and beauty, revitalizing its high society origins. The Gala’s annual theme provides a focus point for attendee’s outfits, spotlighting an influential designer or a cultural aesthetic. The 2021 theme explores the historic American tradition of fashion and its “varied cultural identities.”

After the 2020 event was cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic, viewers impatiently awaited its triumphant comeback. But this year’s Met Gala was mired in controversy and scandal, exposing its inherent problems. Most notable was the invitation of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a New York politician known for her upset congressional victory and progressive views. AOC attended this year’s event wearing a bridal-style gown emblazoned with “Tax the Rich” in bold red letters, to support her overarching policy of increasing marginal tax rates on wealthy Americans. Ironically, the designer who invited her—the Cultural Brokerage Agency—has been served 15 tax warrants and has faced legal action for failing to pay worker benefits. This directly contrasts AOC’s message of working class empowerment. Her appearance sparked questions of her intentions: why is a leftist politician focused on the interests of the working class socializing with the very one-percenters she eschews? She furthered this hypocrisy in her response: “In a follow-up fund-raising email, she directed supporters to buy their own ‘Tax the Rich’ attire.”  AOC attended this event in direct opposition to her socialist politics, then insincerely used this performance to persuade voters to financially support her next campaign.

And AOC isn’t the only offender; the Met Gala is full of celebrities who use vague progressive slogans to bolster their image. For example, Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney cheapened feminist aesthetics with a tacky “Equal Rights Amendment Yes” handbag. At least the two legislators have a political career to back up their posturing, unlike Cara Delevingne’s “Peg the Patriarchy” vest, which reeks of ambiguous white feminism with no real message. The Gala’s virulent publicity allows public figures to assuage their own guilt and bolster their egos with these empty gestures. Such controversy only increases media discussion of the Met Gala in the 24 hour news cycle, indicating that Wintour has clearly embraced the saying “no press is bad press” with her tacit approval of these performative politics. 

The Met Gala is not new to controversy, either. The benefit drew criticism for its 2015 theme: “China: Through the Looking Glass,” a ham-fisted attempt to celebrate Chinese designers which devolved into clear practices of appropriation. Celebrities had free reign to pervert Chinese practices on a hugely public stage. Rita Ora gave a sexualized take on the traditional qipao; Sarah Jessica Parker wore an Orientalist flaming red headpiece; and Lady Gaga sported a kimono-style floor length gown, emulating the wrong East Asian country entirely.  “Heavenly Bodies: Fashion and the Catholic Imagination” secularized important Catholic symbols in 2018, as seen through Rihanna’s Pope-inspired garb. In 2019, Wintour chose “Camp: Notes on Fashion” as the titular theme, but failed to address the queer roots of this tradition. Screenwriter, producer, and actress Lena Waithe called the event out with an embroidered blazer stating that “Black Drag Queens Invented Camp,” but to little effect.

Even the Metropolitan Museum of Art itself isn’t immune to criticism. As the owner of the largest collection of Egyptian art outside of Cairo, the museum upholds historical patterns of Western imperialism and theft of cultural goods. Museum officials even gave an incredibly belated land acknowledgement to the Lenapehoking native tribe in 2021, nearly 150 years after they built the museum on stolen land. And while the Costume Institute is a separate exhibit, its continued theft of non-white aesthetics paints an alarming picture of the institution as a whole. 

In addition to political controversy and blatant appropriation, the Met Gala also perpetuates concerns about the growing wealth gap between the rich and the poor. A single ticket costs $35,000, while a table’s price approaches a baffling $300,000. Besides the exorbitant entrance fee, many attendees spend small fortunes on the perfect attire, to be worn for a single night. Iconic singer Celine Dion’s 2019 dress took 3,000 hours to make from more than 50 tailors, a snapshot of intense beauty and vain opulence. All cameras are focused on social elites flaunting their wealth, while workers must scurry to and fro serving refreshments or holding dress trains. And, of course, this event doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The current climate of the COVID-19 pandemic set collective rules for masking and social distancing. Yet, while service workers practice social responsibility by steadfastly wearing masks, the elite guests forgo them in favor of photo-ops. The very workers who ensure the event runs smoothly are marginalized, invisible to the cameras, physically and socially humiliated. This clear disdain for the working class makes it clear that the Met Gala is no progressive platform for fashion designers and activists alike; it is a physical representation of the class divide plaguing America.

So without corporation fashion, cultural appropriation, and self-serving political statements, what could the Met Gala look like? The solution lies in moving away from Anna Wintour’s singular control and reducing reliance on large corporate brands. Its strengths lie in celebrating marginalized groups and in uplifting up-and-coming designers; these groups should be brought into the planning process. More diversity, both racially and economically, could help prevent future repeats of culturally insensitive themes and help divest the event from its elitism. The singular focus on guests’ social capital and status ultimately detracts from its potential to be a revolutionary and culturally significant event.

The Met Gala is symbolic of the current American sociopolitical climate. The working class is marginalized and hidden while the “elite'' enjoy fine dining, public attention, and exclusive access to a cultural event. Under the guise of culture and fashion, Anna Wintour enables brands to enjoy widespread advertisement of luxury goods and the rich to make vague and arrogant political gestures. This year’s Gala was dedicated to an exploration of the American fashion tradition—and what’s more American than a vapid display of wealth, devoid of culture, historical significance, or self-awareness?