François Picard is pleased to welcome Dana Thomas, author of "Gods and Kings: The Rise and Fall of Alexander McQueen and John Galliano" and the New York Times bestseller "Deluxe: How Luxury Lost Its Luster". The fiery controversy surrounding the Met’s now-cancelled John Galliano retrospective "Horizons" revives the timeless debate over whether we can separate the art from the artist. But our guest argues that the central issue is one of institutional power, with the art itself almost relegated to an afterthought. From her perspective, Galliano’s stature as an artist and fashion designer was never in dispute. His character, however, is once again being called into question in a very public arena.
A retrospective at New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art does more than examine an artist’s legacy: it confers prestige and historical legitimacy. In this case, it would also have given its living subject a key role in shaping the homage to his own life and legacy. Against a backdrop of renewed scrutiny of Galliano’s past racist, anti-Semitic and misogynistic tirades, Thomas argues that such an exhibition cannot be treated as culturally neutral.
Read moreFashion designer Galliano calls off Met Gala exhibit as backlash over anti-Semitic rant mounts
She also turns her attention to Anna Wintour, the former Vogue editor who is a trustee of the Met. Wintour’s decades-long friendship with Galliano, coupled with her formidable presence in fashion spanning nearly half a century, casts a harsh light on the tensions that arise when the rarefied worlds of art, fashion and high society collide with the responsibilities of a world-renowned cultural institution.
What might be explained away within the tightly controlled, cut-throat world of fashion, prestige, power and celebrity becomes considerably more contentious at a New York museum cherished around the world, with a civic role, a formidable reputation and a diverse public to serve.
Ultimately, for Dana Thomas, this is not about erasing Galliano’s legacy from the world of fashion, but rather about which institutions confer legitimacy, and how history should be written.
