#commonplaces

Tickets to the Met Gala cost an eye-watering $75,000 each, with a ten-seat table starting at approximately $350,000. Those are truly mental prices. While I understand the importance of preserving archival fashion pieces, the fact that the 2023 Gala raised over 26 million dollars makes the backlash some celebrities face feel misplaced. 

Here’s the thing: invited guests don’t actually pay for their attendance. Fashion houses, like Chanel, typically purchase tables and invite those individuals to model their designs. Sure, some celebrities are well aware of the money behind these events, but honestly, do you think they’re sitting there calculating how else the funds could be spent? For most of them, 26 million dollars is a mere drop in the ocean compared to their net worth.

The skyrocketing costs and increasingly theatrical themes have turned the Met Gala into something resembling the Capitol celebrations from The Hunger Games. It’s become a caricature of its former self. Imagine if the money raised went toward fostering new designers, raising awareness, or supporting those who lack access to fashion’s inner circles. Fashion has always had the power to be a form of protest, and the Met Gala has proven it can be—but is it still living up to that potential?

The Power of Fashion in the MET.

The theme for 2024 was based on The Garden of Time, a story of a count and countess who protect themselves from an advancing mob by using magical time flowers to rewind events. However, the more they use the flowers, the scarcer they become. Eventually, they exhaust the final flower, and the mob breaks into their home—only to find the couple turned into stone statues. J.G. Ballard’s story has inspired many interpretations that resonate with modern issues. It critiques the divide between social classes, symbolizing the count and countess as the wealthy, isolated from the "mob" of common people. Another reading reflects on the eternal cycle of creation and destruction in human history, reminding us of our responsibility to sustain peace and avoid self-inflicted ruin.

Fashion, like Ballard’s story, can be a powerful form of protest, as demonstrated by the 2021 Met Gala. With the theme In America: An Anthology of Fashion, attendees like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wore statement pieces such as her iconic TAX THE RICH dress. Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney highlighted the Equal Rights Amendment through her gown, and Megan Rapinoe advocated LGBTQ rights with her clutch reading In Gays We Trust. These weren’t just fashion statements—they were tied to meaningful action.

That year, however, the Met Gala lacked that connection. Instead people felt like the Gala was just an opulent distraction and felt like people needed to be talking instead about the bombings happening in Rafa. The wealth displayed, the lack of advocacy and discussions about the gala infuriated people, an insensitive portrayal of wealth, during a time where there was a great wave of helplessness towards these crises and a need for empathy. The Gala just reminded people of the large divide between them and the one percent. 

The algorithm-driven nature of social media complicated things. People would comment “all eyes on Rafa” under posts about the Met Gala, criticising celebrities for not advocating and criticising influencers who were talking about the Gala. Although it raises awareness, it also  also leads to more Met-related content in your feed. Soon, it feels like the event is the only thing happening because the algorithm believes that you would like to see more content like the Met, which leads to greater frustration. Algorithms remain a powerful force that is greatly taken for granted and underestimated.

However, I also got annoyed, this is my opinion based on my experience, but I felt like I only saw “All eyes on Rafa”, I didn’t see comments explaining what had happened, why this is linked to the Gala, or even accounts getting promoted who are speaking out and educating people on what is happening. I didn’t see the content from those advocating and working toward change. Instead it was criticism, and honestly, a hive mind. Countless people wrote the same text, but I was curious, in all these people, how many were properly informed and how many were just following what they saw online. Hell, I strongly advise against getting your news on social media, make sure your sources are credible, and fact check!!! 

HALEY BALEY : MISUNDERSTANDING MARIE ANTOINETTE 

Haley Kalil, better known as Haleyy Baylee, became the target of backlash after posting a TikTok lip-syncing to an audio with a line from Sofia Coppola’s Marie Antoinette “Let them eat cake.” This sparked a chain reaction causing the “digital guillotines” , which I personally believe is just an exaggerated title when all you are doing is blocking celebrities online. 

First, the line itself: “Let them eat cake” is famously attributed to Marie Antoinette but has been widely debunked by historians, the line is a myth. It likely originated in philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Confessions, written years before she was even queen. Instead it is believed that this line was adopted as revolutionary propaganda to vilify her and the monarchy. I mean people often describe Marie Antoinette as a greedy monarch, living in opulence and not caring for her subjects. In reality, Marie Antoinette was known for her charitable work, including supporting the Maison Philanthropique, creating homes for the poor, and adopting children in need. She even elevated figures like Joseph Bologne, Chevalier de Saint-Georges, a biracial composer, to prominence in her court—an extremely bold move in her time.

People often place the blame for France’s financial crisis, solely on Antoinette, believing she was the main cause for the revolution. Yet no one talks about Louis XVI, the king, who lacked any sort of political insight. His inability to address the financial crisis France was facing or any effort of reforms angered the people. It was Louis who lacked any ability to moderate money, spending it to fight expensive wars overseas. It was Louis who did not listen or care about what the government or advisors had to say, only relying on his divine right as king . Failure after failure plunged France into extreme amounts of famine, debt and poverty. These failures garnered awareness, the people had seen the success of the American revolution and many more wanted to have democracy, philosophy and religion challenged, peasants no longer wanting to work or support the feudal system. Thus the revolution broke out, the bourgeois executed and France became a democracy, and the winning side always writes the history. Therefore people are more inclined to believe that Marie Antoinette sincerely said “Let them eat cake”

The problem with Haley Kalil’s TikTok wasn’t just her use of the audio, it’s the context. Coppola’s film is a creative, stylized take on Antoinette’s life, blending historical elements with modern aesthetics, such as having her wear converse sneakers in one scene, to humanize her, a reminder to the audience that Marie Antoinette was a teenager, young, not a monarch. The movie is not a history lesson, but many still associate the queen with this dramatized version.

In my opinion, the outrage surrounding Kalil’s post feels misplaced. TikTok audios like this are often used for costume or outfit reveals, not deep political commentary. The real issue isn’t her use of the audio but the person themselves, the video highlights this carefree indulgence in a period of current economic and social struggles. Her apology didn’t help either, claiming, “I’m just like you,” while attending events like the Met Gala, where entry costs more than most people’s yearly salaries.

Yet criticizing someone for using an already misattributed quote in a TikTok misses the larger picture. Why not direct that energy toward holding the systems of excess accountable rather than a single influencer? After all, history is nuanced, and so is the way we engage with it today.

FORCED VS VOLUNTARY

The distinction between forced and voluntary protesting is more than just a matter of motivation, it reflects the depth of commitment and the authenticity behind the action. Understanding this difference can clarify why one approach often has a more meaningful impact than the other.

Voluntary protesting stems from a place of genuine passion and personal conviction. When someone chooses to speak out, it’s because they feel deeply connected to the issue and believe their voice or actions can contribute to meaningful change. Voluntary protesters take the time to learn about the cause, share important information, and amplify the voices of those directly affected. This kind of activism often sets a strong example for others, encouraging thoughtful and purposeful engagement.

In contrast, forced protesting arises when individuals feel compelled to participate out of fear, whether it’s fear of backlash, being perceived as indifferent, or facing social ostracism. This type of protesting can lack authenticity because the motivation isn’t rooted in a genuine understanding of the issue but in external pressures. For example, demanding influencers to speak up on every important topic, even when they aren’t fully informed, can lead to performative activism. This is harmful not only because it can spread misinformation but also because it detracts from the voices of those with lived experiences and true insight into the matter.

The expectation that everyone must take a public stand can be overwhelming, especially for those who may not feel equipped to engage in meaningful discourse or who fear the personal or professional consequences of speaking out. Bravery is required to address controversial topics, but bravery isn’t universal, and not everyone is ready to face potential backlash.

I’m sick of people pressuring and criticising others for not using their platforms in a way that they deem right. Advocacy cannot be diminished to a one-off act or a hashtag trend. It requires consistent effort, like regular donations or amplifying voices already at the forefront of the cause. 

Instead of forcing participation, the focus should be on creating an environment where people feel supported to engage authentically. Education plays a key role here, learning about issues, understanding their complexities, and sharing stories or art that resonate can lead to informed action. Encouraging people to find legitimate charities and reliable sources, promoting creators and organizations already working to make a difference, and giving platforms to those directly affected are far more effective strategies than coercion.

Moreover, activism isn’t always about grand gestures. Small, consistent actions like regular donations, ongoing awareness, and meaningful discussions can often make a bigger impact than one-time statements. This applies not only to influencers and celebrities but to everyone. Real, lasting change comes from setting an example through consistent, informed actions, not from criticizing or demanding performative participation.

In the end, it’s about building a movement rooted in understanding and collective determination, where everyone feels inspired,not obligated, to contribute.

We as a collective all have so much more power and ability to raise awareness and all my respect goes to the people who are doing everything they can do to help. We live in an era where virality and fame can be achieved without leaving the bedroom, where we can become celebrities.

I’m sick of seeing the creative industries and artists face the backlash, yet we don’t hold the millionaires, politicians, CEOs accountable. We don’t even consider them. It’s like there's this feudal system of hierarchy, the arts at the bottom, and some people refuse to take a step back and look at the full image. They just follow what they hear, and repeat it, like a hive.  

CONCLUSION/ FINAL THOUGHTS:

My heart goes out to all the countless innocent people stuck in the middle of this war, no one deserves to go through such inhumane experiences.