The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s famed Met Gala boasts the biggest celebrity names and some of the year’s most outrageous fashion looks, at the price of $30,000 per ticket. It is viewed by millions across the world through live streams and social media commentary, and there is seldom a year where the internet does not explode. In 2019, the internet was shocked when Katy Perry dressed as a chandelier and a hamburger in the same night. This year, the internet criticism widely circled Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) (D-NY 14th District).
On Sept. 13, AOC attended the Met Gala sporting a white dress emblazoned with the words ‘TAX THE RICH’ in bright red. Her appearance and outfit caused a storm of online criticism from all sides of the political spectrum. Many of her own supporters accused her of hypocrisy and reducing the importance of income inequality. In response, Ocasio-Cortez argued that the Met belongs to the people of New York, and the Gala provides an opportunity to take a political stance with fashion as a medium.
The Met Gala is inherently classist. The exorbitant amount of money raised benefits the Metropolitan Museum’s costume institute, which, while amazing in its artistry, does little to benefit the people of New York City beyond cultural enrichment. It does, however, broadcast across the world. It is made attractive to viewers through the celebrities and their outrageous costumes, creating a perfect environment to make a statement, which is exactly what Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez did. The congresswoman’s actions constitute a self-aware, audacious confrontation. AOC did not pay for her ticket or her dress. She used the very medium of the Met Gala, fashion, to critique the event and those attending. She waltzed among people who easily paid the massive, required sum — her dress a reminder of what she stands for. Given her background and political history, it should be simple to view her as an infiltrator of the American elite, subverting the glorification of wealth with a borrowed, politically charged dress.
An online majority has also latched onto the idea that AOC is a hypocrite. She is a democratic socialist, yet she is gallivanting across the red carpet and rubbing elbows with rich celebrities. Her critics purport the message on her dress to be lazy, empty and meaningless to the cause she claims to support. Her dress, according to multiple commenters, reduced the urgency of the idea, turning a nationwide problem into a catchy phrase.
On the other hand, I understood her statement as a straightforward, in-your-face message that leaves no room for interpretation. Given outside context — the location, the people who spent thousands upon thousands to be there, the fact that AOC did not spend a cent — the short, quippy catch phrase becomes blatantly confrontational. The controversy is primarily an issue of perspective. There is plenty of evidence to interpret AOC’s attendance as interesting and effective, as I do. Instead, many of her own supporters preferred the opposing interpretation.Why were many so quick to call her a hypocrite, to claim she did not embody the principles of a “woman of the people”? Why assume her message to be meaningless, rather than strikingly meaningful?
I believe the root of the problem, like many issues, is the painfully sharp “us v. them” divide that has grown from American capitalism. It permeates nearly all aspects of society, contributing to growing polarization and resentment. The true issue is the fact that AOC attended the Met Gala at all. Even if she made a political statement and is not extraordinarily wealthy, she appeared at an event that screams “exclusivity” and “celebrity.” As a woman who worked as a bartender and whose career was built on a grassroots movement, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez garnered political support because she was an outsider — one of the people. Her Met Gala attendance threw her supporters’ sense of what she represents into disarray. By walking the red carpet, AOC crossed from “us” to “them”, betraying the values she was elected for. The Met Gala places large emphasis on appearance, particularly on outfits and the celebrities wearing them. It is only logical that AOC, crossing the metaphorical line, would have her own attendance and statement reduced to face-value.
